Re: Speaking of First Amendments

Speaking of First Amendments

Tiggity®

Ultimate Clemson Legend [104208]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 68245

Joined: 2002

Aug 12, 2024, 11:57 AM [ in reply to Re: Speaking of First Amendments ]

It all started with an ill-conceived federal income tax. From there, all things become possible for the federal governemnt. Want NO religion in schools, throw them federal dollars, and you can force them into excluding religion completely. Want a 21yo drinking age, make that a condition for road funding. Want a 21yo tobacco age, make that a condition for covid funding. Want religion excluded from a "state-funded" education, attach it to an education bill.

Our founders wanted NO OFFICIAL NATIONAL religion. No official religion of the UNITED STATES. States, however, have that (or had) that leeway, in the past to support their own citizens and whatever religion was a majority in that state. In Utah you can not promote the mormon religion in any state funded school because the state gets a large portion of funds from the FEDERAL governemnt. This places a state full of atheists at an advantage over states who would otherwise fund schools that did promote a religion.

I'm very consistent on this principle as being deleterious to our republic. Just as a parent giving their kid money and demanding obedience/compliance in return for that money. You know, the rich kid who grows up, but never grows up, because mommy and daddy still fund them, and therefore control them. If the parents don't like a girlfriend, dump her, or lose your stipend. It's bad family, bad governemnt, bad business.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

I'm with you in theory. In an ideal world, what we'd see is something more akin to the EU but with a common defense, drastically reduce our unwieldy and bloated Federal government, and follow the good Libertarian credo of letting the government closest to you be the one that governs most. Dealing with Washington is basically impossible, dealing with City Hall is a whole lot easier.

So in theory, anyhow, it'd be great if much like the EU, every state basically did its own thing. The rub is, what we're seeing with the EU is that too much independence can make a central government too weak to be effective, and we're seeing the Brits on one side bail on it and corrupt populist Eastern European states like Turkey, Hungary, and Slovakia go straight Fascist and basically rot the union out from the inside on the East side of the EU, and like bad apples their corruption tends to infect the states around them.

And those states aren't one-tenth as complicated as the US is, in terms of ethnicities and religions and cultures.

So again, I'm with you in theory. But in practice it could one mother of a rough landing to implement it. Can we really just completely upend our power structure without causing bloodbaths on a Biblical scale across the US and the dissolution of the USA?

Speaking of First Amendments

speaking of Vero Beach

They shouldn't. Period.***

Re: They shouldn't. Period.***