Over 150 years ago, we fought a civil war over secession. States seceded with charters, and in these primary source documents these states listed the right of a state to own slaves as a primary cause for secession. If you want to come swinging at me that I’m wrong with my points about slavery, go check the primary source documents yourself.

Lately we’ve seen states roll back voting rights and now abortion access under the guise of states’ rights.

Before I was born, a policy of segregation and Jim Criw existed under the guise of states’ rights.

So I ask all of you the following question. How come certain states have used states’ rights to restrict the rights and humanity of Americans that belong to minority groups? I thought we settled this back in the 1860s and 1960s that such practices were unamerican.

It is a complicated topic. Here is a good read if you have the time.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/truth-about-states%E2%80%99-rights-13685.html

The issue of slavery is a bit outdated. no?

As far as elections, the states hold most of that power. The question is do the laws of states (some) restrict a person's ability to vote? Some seem to think some basic requirements are necessary, some think not, or at minimum think some of the requirements are restrictive. That is where we are at.

If there was any justification for requiring or tightening the requirements to vote - then I might see them as being valid.

There is no justification. It is a contrived, fake narrative concocted by the likes of Bannon and the immoral side of the far right who are willing to do anything and say anything to appeal to a section of what is now known as "Trump's Base" - it has been proven that there is no mass voter fraud. Trump himself proved it while he was in office and conducted a house committee to look into it. There has been endless court cases since last November highlighting a complete and total lack of any evidence to support all these loud claims.

There is no need to tighten and make it harder to vote with policies that overwhelmingly impact one segment of society. My view is that anyone buying into the propaganda and who tries to be an echo chamber for this totally false narrative is a Muppet, or worse.

No it isn't:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...ition-bring-back-slavery-sue-di-rcna5841

https://rollingout.com/2019/12/21/t...saying-she-wanted-to-bring-back-slavery/

Really? I guess with that one I'll check out. There's no point in sticking around.

Later. Have a good day.

C'mon bro, when a teacher from the Space and Aeronautics Gateway to Exploration Magnet Academy wants to bring back slavery, you have to at least entertain the conversation...

So you don't think high school kids circulating a petition to bring back slavery is relevant to the statement I addressed?

The statement that you addressed? That there is a slavery issue in this country??

Nope. Not at all. "Who cares?" is the only rational response. I could start a petition to import purple pumpkins from the planet Zircon... it will have no bearing on anyone's lives. Instead of having a conversation about the real impact of states' rights you want to sidebar to argue about whether the possibility of slavery still exists, just because 'Peen said the notion is outdated.

I think whether the topic of slavery is outdated is a matter of perspective. We are a very young nation from a timeline perspective. France as an example has been a country since 486 A.D. India since 2500 B.C. I could continue but I think you get the idea. To those nations 155 years is a blip on their timeline. More or less the blink of an eye.

Then once again you have to consider perspective. If you are looking at the strictest definition of slavery I can see how, once again considering the short timeline we have actually been a nation, you could see it as something that is outdated. But if you look at some of the ideology of slavery and how that was manipulated to continue as many see it, it's really not outdated at all. Were Jim crow laws actually slavery in the strictest sense of the word? No they were not. But they helped perpetuate many of the ideas and double standards that existed during slavery. The same goes for segregation. The same goes for having certain areas blacks were not allowed to be given home loans which restricted where they could live and buy property and homes. Standing up for themselves brought the Klan as threats to them.

So we can certainly say there was an end to slavery long ago. We can also say that many states made, created and instituted laws that put up barriers to insure that black Americans certainly wouldn't be as free as white Americans. And many Americans see that as a continuation of slavery to some extent. Just think, up until the mid 1960's black people couldn't even eat at the same places, sleep at the same motels or even drink out of the same water fountains as white people. That wasn't so log ago.

Only people from the planet Zicron never enslaved a race of people in our nation. Once again I see this somewhere in the middle. Does what these kids are doing impact the life of anyone? No. And if that's the point you're trying to make here, we agree.

But somewhere, somehow these kids got this notion in their heads this was a good idea. Where that idea came from is the bigger issue and I think how that happened is something we should care about.

Well put.

We are the United States of America. We are united in a common cause the Constitution. Does each State have to enact the same laws? No! But, principle needs to stay consistent with the Constitution. I do not want to live in a Federal Government controlled society. Each State should decide how their State operates under the guiding Principle of the US Constitution.

There have been 27 amendments to the constitution. So let's not pretend it's written in stone. It is a living document which has changed over time. What it says and what it all means has been debated since this nation began. We have people who actually specialize in what it means. Constitutional scholars and lawyers. The SCOTUS which is a special body all in itself to help resolve constitutional issue. Let's not pretend this is a cut and dry issue.

bro i sweat thats what annoys me so much. people act like the constitution has stayed the same since its founding. people act like the flag has always had 50 stars on it.

just like people somehow think "in god we trust" has always been on our currency, or prayer has always been in schools.

i dont know how people get these narratives. probably just as sign that our education system is a failure, because the people who swear they know their history dont ever seem to know their history.

State's Rights are EVERYTHING not explicitly granted as a power to the Federal Government by the Constitution. That's your definition.

Why do some states try things they shouldn't? Because Humans.
History shows us again and again (how nature points out the folly of men. Go Godzilla!) that it only takes one person, or one small group of persons, to make crazy happen; that one person/group just has to get enough political will following along that nobody interferes with what they're doing before they do it. Where the Constitution also comes into play is that the states cannot do anything that - and neither can the Feds - that infringes upon the Rights of the Citizens.

Like owning slaves?

No, that's against the Rights of citizens. What part is confusing you, or what point do you think you're making?

thats the flaw we have to properly manage in the system right? fortunately/unfortunately, too many things are left up to interpretation. every government has its inherent flaw i guess. ours is one that cant be insanely easy to manage, or insanely difficult to.

and just for an example, have you heard about this so called "american redoubt" stuff going in the idaho area? i wonder how that conflicts with the constitution, if at all, but its some strange stuff going on up there.

The slaves were not citizens at that time. They were property just the way dogs are today.


So then it is it your contention that removing property from our citizens would not be infringing on their rights? You see, that was one of the changes in the constitution.


The point I'm making is that we have seen where doing what's right has trumped the constitution. The end of slavery in effect took away our citizens right to own slaves as their property. It took away what was at the time property they had bought and paid for. I'm pretty sure many of them considered that an infringement of their rights. At the time before the constitution was changed, freeing slaves was a crime and considered by law to be stealing.

Would you be good with a country run by an authoritarian?

You mean a leader who mandates what medicines we must take and what clothes we must wear(masks)?

A leader who abandons our citizens on the battlefield?

So 7 9th graders were involved in a petition started over a fight... and a teacher is crazy... that's your foundation for some mass movement that's going on?

No, I mean a fascist like Trump. Not a real democratic POTUS like Biden, who operates 100% within the law and norms we have established over the last 200+ years of being a free country. It is the right that thinks it's ok to scrap America to stay in power, but you damn well know that.

I never said there was a mass movement. I just gave a couple quick examples of that the concept isn't dead. And just because it was a few high school kids that started ther petition, that doesn't lessen the significance. HS kids don't just come up with that stuff out of the blue. They learn it from their families.

Given the way the republican party is going, it wouldn't surprise me if she ends up runnig for congress as a republican *cough* majorie taylor greene *cough*

states need protection from the country
counties need protection from the state
cities need protection from counties

Yet some Republican governors have made it illegal for cities and counties with high Covid rates from enacting restrictions to protect their citizens and trying to lessen the outbreaks.

While Democrat governors lock people down and force them to show their papers in order to eat a meal.

Built a career? Too bad, do as we say or lose it.

Lack of Nurses, Firefighters, or Police when you need them because they won't abide by our Mandates, too bad. Die because of us instead of the virus.

Newsflash: That's the flaw in EVERY system.

All political and governmental systems are perfect until you put Humans into them. Then, absolutely NONE of them are any better than the people at the top of each tier.

Over 1100 American deaths a day must sound better to you.


the choice is yours. Excuses for not doing your part in preventing American deaths is sickening.


Can you show me anywhere these mandates have been enacted that have created this situation? Last time I checked they were only fear tactics being talked about.

Here's what ACTUALLY happens.

Mayor: 9 in 10 NYC Workers Vaccinated as Deadline Nears

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/cor...-nyc-workers-are-now-vaccinated/3366097/

The shortages you act like are from mandates are actually happening all over the country whether there are mandates in place or not.

Just screaming about things and making false claims do not make them so.

Nationwide nursing shortage is leading to big salary boosts

https://fortune.com/2021/11/19/nursing-shortage-salary-increases-average-pay/

86% of police departments are facing police shortages. In both red and blue states. Stop just repeating what you're being spoon fed.

This police department saw in 23% decrease between 2013 and 2016 alone. YEARS before the pandemic.

Officials say there's a nationwide police shortage and it's affecting Polk County as well

https://www.theledger.com/story/new...say-its-not-because-covid-19/8164249002/

true. luckily, the federal government cannot force itself upon the states and there are many constitutional laws to stop overreach.

If anyone believes that the problem with our government is that the states have too much power and not the federal government....smh I don't know what to tell you.

Problems always arise when people feel like they're being governed by people who don't represent their ideals and interests. The conservative mindset and worldview today is about as radically different from the liberal mindset and worldview as it can possibly get.

People in the midwest feel like they are being lorded over by east and west coast elites, and liberals feel like they are being held back by the flyover states.

The more you bring the power of the government closer to the people the better, IMO. We have gone backwards in this country, and moved that power further and further away.

I'm not sure why liberals would be opposed to this idea? They claim to be victims of a racist and unjust system, but instead of wanting to take back power from the federal government, they want to give more power to the federal government? How does that make any sense?

I think it makes no less sense than driving over an imaginary line and suddenly that gun you can carry with no permit becomes a felony for carrying without a permit. The same goes for weed as an example. It may be perfectly legal to possess in one state while you can be fined or even jailed in the next state. It's almost as if you need a law degree when going on vacation. Adultery as an example is still illegal and can be punished by law in all of the following states. Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. As much as states rights are important to a point, when you have laws that vary so much from state to state it becomes quite the conundrum for your citizens.

Let's take the pandemic as an example. If people never traveled or left their own states there would be no need for a national policy in terms of a pandemic. But that's not how any of this works. How one state handles the pandemic can negatively impact every surrounding state. It's a national heath issue not s state issue.