Ron Paul

[saturnfan]

If the Constitution is outdated, the solution isn't to ignore it, but to amend it.

Alright, I've got an idea for an amendment. How about an amendment that bans slavery? What? Half the states wouldn't ratify it? Well then how do we get rid of it?

-posted from 1840

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Seriously, anyone who supports Ron Paul's platform really, really needs to 1) actually read the damned Constitution, 2) take some courses on US history and Constitutional Law, and 3) actually read what Ron Paul supports now and has supported in the past. As I've said before, Ron Paul is 150 years too late a politician.

I have read the constitution, am applying for PhD programs in history and have read about what Ron Paul has currently and has in the past supported. But oops, I still like him.

[BoringSupreez]

Why does there need to be an amendment to eliminate slavery? The states and their citizens can decide for themselves.

I think there was a war about this...

It shouldn't have taken a war, though.

[dsheinem]

Why does there need to be an amendment to eliminate slavery? The states and their citizens can decide for themselves.

I think there was a war about this...

It shouldn't have taken a war, though.

No, of course not: states should have just been able to keep on having slaves. And then they should have been able to allow only white males to vote, then they should have been able to remain segregated. They should also be able to use their own currency, have their own foreign ambassadors, and generally be completely free of the the federal government's "interference".

[saturnfan]

I agree, lets solve all our social ills through war. It expedites the process.

[BoringSupreez]

I think there was a war about this...

It shouldn't have taken a war, though.

No, of course not: states should have just been able to keep on having slaves. And then they should have been able to allow only white males to vote, then they should have been able to remain segregated. They should also be able to use their own currency, have their own foreign ambassadors, and generally be completely free of the the federal government's "interference".

As far as the constitution and federal laws allow such things, yes.

Besides, Britain (and Brazil, I think) managed to end slavery without a civil war. No reason we couldn't have, in time.

[dsheinem]

I agree, lets solve all our social ills through war. It expedites the process.

Fair point, although you know better than I that slavery was only one of many problems leading to war...and that more diplomatic and legislative measures had also been tried for many many years previously. Was war the best way? Probably not...it rarely is.

[dsheinem]

I think there was a war about this...

It shouldn't have taken a war, though.

No, of course not: states should have just been able to keep on having slaves. And then they should have been able to allow only white males to vote, then they should have been able to remain segregated. They should also be able to use their own currency, have their own foreign ambassadors, and generally be completely free of the the federal government's "interference".

As far as the constitution and federal laws allow such things, yes.

Law is a living, breathing concept - this has always been true and also applies to the Holy Constitution.

[saturnfan]

I agree, lets solve all our social ills through war. It expedites the process.

Fair point, although you know better than I that slavery was only one of many problems leading to war...and that more diplomatic and legislative measures had also been tried for many many years previously. Was war the best way? Probably not...it rarely is.

I have pondered this a bit. I feel if Lincoln was a better statesmen he would have devoted all his mental and diplomatic energy into securing the loyalty of the upper south before setting his sites on reuniting the lower south (remembering that the south seceded in two waves, with the upper south being a little hesitant to jump ship). But, also, that's all Monday morning quarterbacking. An interesting theoretical thesis at best.

But that also discounts the upcoming crisis. Another set of what ifs occur when you look closely at what happened, and what should have happened in order to create harmony.

[saturnfan]

Besides, Britain (and Brazil, I think) managed to end slavery without a civil war. No reason we couldn't have, in time.

If memory serves me correctly, the Unites States and Haiti were the only two places to have slavery abolished because of the outcome of a war.

[BoringSupreez]

As far as the constitution and federal laws allow such things, yes.

Law is a living, breathing concept - this has always been true and also applies to the Holy Constitution.

So is the constitution. That's why we have amendments.