He went. - Discussion Forum - The Massassi Temple Forums Archive

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

He went.

2012-01-14, 2:43 PM #81

The Ego Has Landed

Posts: 5,876

Quote:

Because businesses totally would do what is right for the community and NEVER would even THINK about doing something that would have horrible effects on the community just to make some money...

Does this have some connection to the previous comment?

Quote:

No one thinks this. Everyone acknowledges there are limits.

Disregarding the absolute which is, of course, false; that limit is a vague thing decided by the courts, and it is constantly moving. But only in one direction.

2012-01-14, 3:25 PM #82

Michael MacFarlane

Unwitting troll accomplice

Posts: 8,272

I've never heard anyone seriously and sincerely argue that the Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate literally anything. The only time I ever hear anything like that, it's from someone who wants to criticize a decision by claiming that's the logical conclusion. So while it's probably not literally true that no one makes the claim, anyone who does is so marginal that they might as well not exist. It's also not true that there's been no pushback on what the Commerce Clause allows; see U.S. v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), U.S. v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000).

As for vague, well, welcome to the Constitution.

If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.

2012-01-16, 1:33 AM #83

Mentat

Human Computer

Posts: 2,844

Originally posted by JM:

I really don't see how that's different from the people who think the commerce clause gives the federal government the power to regulate everything.

The Commerce Clause is a good example. If Paul was as interested in what Jefferson had to say regarding the seperation of church & state as he is in what he had to say about the Commerce Clause, there'd probably be justification for taking him seriously. However, he appears to cherry-pick the framers intentions like an Evangelical reading the old testament. He's certainly not alone, but it's no less disturbing when he does it. The constitution is certainly vague. The question should be whether that's a blessing or a curse.

? :)