Federal Government Working to Remove Sovereignty of States

[Free Palestine]

Excellent news!

Yes, it's excellent that that individuals who partake in the usage of medical cannabis still have to live in fear because of federal law.  It's excellent that power lies not in a government that the people have the most potential to influence, and it's awesome that the government can do whatever the hell it wants, Constitution be damned.

[Free Palestine]

It's so horrible that people in another part of the country disagree and can make laws that I don't like.  I'm never going to live in Alabama or go anywhere near there, but it is very important to me that they not ban abortion.

[Free Palestine]

It's so horrible that people in another part of the country disagree and can make laws that I don't like.  I'm never going to live in Alabama or go anywhere near there, but it is very important to me that they not ban abortion.

Yes, because, not being a libertarian, I am not a selfish narcissist, and I care about the rights of all Americans, not just those who live in states that protect these rights.

But you are a pompous egotist, which is why you believe that your idea of "rights" should be imposed on the entire nation.  People in Alabama, for instance, believe that abortion is an infringement on human rights.  You believe otherwise, and you are no more right than they are, except in your own head.

[Free Palestine]

Tone it down a notch.  Deleted the crazy Hitler post, but c'mon peeps

Seemed like at least a semi-valid point, nothing worth deleting.

[Free Palestine]

It's so horrible that people in another part of the country disagree and can make laws that I don't like.  I'm never going to live in Alabama or go anywhere near there, but it is very important to me that they not ban abortion.

Yes, because, not being a libertarian, I am not a selfish narcissist, and I care about the rights of all Americans, not just those who live in states that protect these rights.

So you are openly a fascist now?

You're going to have to explain to me how a post about wanting the rights of all Americans, regardless of their geographic location, be protected means I'm a fascist.

As I've said, it's what you feel are the "rights of all Americans."  And that's the whole problem.

[Free Palestine]

Really, there is no reason why Massachusetts and Alabama should have the same laws regarding abortion or same-sex marriage, except that some pompous egotists, on both sides of the political spectrum, feel that their ideas of "rights" should be imposed on both regions.  Mike Huckabee wants abortion and same-sex marriage federally banned, as some on the left want both federally legalized.  They don't care if a majority of the population in Vermont or Texas or Oregon would feel differently.  It's their way or the highway.  All it boils down to is egotism, as well as petty nationalism.

[Free Palestine]

How dare rights be universal!

How dare people think abortion is murder!

If you like human rights then your a fascist?

No.  I like human rights, but I'm not a moral absolutist.

I'd might be fine with constitutional amendments to legalize same-sex marriage and abortion, if three-fourths of the states and two-thirds of the House and Senate would approve such a thing.

[Free Palestine]

So if, say a state legalized rape, the government should do... nothing?

States aren't going to legalize rape.  That's just absurd.  But, the federal government doesn't have a constitutional authority to intervene.  If a state seriously does legalize rape, and the others are horrified enough, they could go ahead and pass a Constitutional amendment...

[Free Palestine]

I'll let you guys argue.  I suck at being a libertarian.

[Free Palestine]

How dare rights be universal!

Universality is not the problem. The problem is that the federal state seeks to impose its fiat legal code onto people against their will. Ultimately the end result of radical decentralization of law is a legal system that is both universal and consistant.

How does decentralization lead to consistency?

Ultimately, if you take it down to the individual level, it becomes an individual choice without any government intervention on any level. For example, suppose the feds left abortion up to the states. And then the states further decentralize to the counties. And they leave it to the cities. And they leave eventually leave it to the individual, in which people are left to choose whether or not to have an abortion.

But how do you know the states would choose to decentralize? The same end result could be achieved just by the feds mandating that people are left to choose for themselves.

If the states choose not to decentralize, then so be it.

[Free Palestine]

How dare rights be universal!

Universality is not the problem. The problem is that the federal state seeks to impose its fiat legal code onto people against their will. Ultimately the end result of radical decentralization of law is a legal system that is both universal and consistant.

How does decentralization lead to consistency?

Ultimately, if you take it down to the individual level, it becomes an individual choice without any government intervention on any level. For example, suppose the feds left abortion up to the states. And then the states further decentralize to the counties. And they leave it to the cities. And they leave eventually leave it to the individual, in which people are left to choose whether or not to have an abortion.

But how do you know the states would choose to decentralize? The same end result could be achieved just by the feds mandating that people are left to choose for themselves.

If the states choose not to decentralize, then so be it.

Ok, then it's not universal and consistent.

I'm not saying it has to be.

[Free Palestine]

How dare rights be universal!

How dare people think abortion is murder!

And if one were to believe that, presumably they would want it banned everywhere.

Not if they believe in Constitutional, limited government.  There are a lot of conservatives who believe it is an issue that should be left to the states.

[Free Palestine]

How dare rights be universal!

How dare people think abortion is murder!

And if one were to believe that, presumably they would want it banned everywhere.

Not if they believe in Constitutional, limited government.  There are a lot of conservatives who believe it is an issue that should be left to the states.

Because the sanctioning of murder by Constitutional, limited government is a good idea.

Conservatives who believe in state sovereignty usually recognize that there is serious contention over whether or not abortion really is murder.  They believe it is, but respect the rights of people in other states to make their own laws.  They recognize that the Constitutional purpose of the federal government is not to prevent murder.

[Free Palestine]

Problem is, there's a bit of contention over whether or not abortion is murder.  Some people believe it's about a woman's right to choose, and if people who believe this constitute a majority of the population in a state, they should be able to make their own laws on the matter.

Lief's argument for centralization of power sounds to me like the perfect argument for internationalism and meddling in foreign affairs.  He said:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why stop there?  Maybe we should go around the world toppling regimes to ensure human rights.  Maybe we should stop other countries, democratic countries even, from doing things that we don't like because we feel it violates human rights.  Localism or the beliefs of the people be damned.

[Free Palestine]

State's rights? Why stop there?! We should let each city do whatever it wants to its people, civil rights and the well-being of the citizens be damned! But hey, why should people in the north part of the city get to force their opinions on people in the south part of the city? Surely what we need is neighborhood governments. Let each neighborhood define what murder is! But you know what, maybe I have a different idea of what rights mean than my neighbor does. Each person needs to be their own government, so that no one's opinions are forced on anybody!

See, I can do stupid slippery slopes too.

You and Franzl fail at arguing against decentralization.