LDS Plan

[Bluejay]

Hi, InquisitiveSoul

I assume this message was a response to me?

The Consitution of The United States protects States Rights under the 10th Amendment.

I understand that the Constitution says X and the Yth Amendment says Z.

But, is that really the reason you think the power should be vested in the states?

You have to admit, "because it's written on Document X" is a pretty feeble reason, regardless of what Document X is.

Surely there’s a principle behind it that you support.

[MarginOfError]

Hi, InquisitiveSoul

I assume this message was a response to me?

I understand that the Constitution says X and the Yth Amendment says Z.

But, is that really the reason you think the power should be vested in the states?

You have to admit, "because it's written on Document X" is a pretty feeble reason, regardless of what Document X is.

Surely there’s a principle behind it that you support.

A feeble reason? The point of having documents that spell out law is ensure a proper guideline and process for governing so that tyranny and repression do not find an easy path, if any at all, into our lives. So when a nation accepts Document X, then adhering to the qualities of Document X because it is written on Document X is a very good reason. Else, there is no rule of law.

[vestig8or]

Hi, InquisitiveSoul

I assume this message was a response to me?

I understand that the Constitution says X and the Yth Amendment says Z.

But, is that really the reason you think the power should be vested in the states?

You have to admit, "because it's written on Document X" is a pretty feeble reason, regardless of what Document X is.

Surely there’s a principle behind it that you support.

I think the principle is balance of power.

[Bluejay]

Hi, MarginOfError.

A feeble reason? The point of having documents that spell out law is ensure a proper guideline and process for governing so that tyranny and repression do not find an easy path, if any at all, into our lives. So when a nation accepts Document X, then adhering to the qualities of Document X because it is written on Document X is a very good reason. Else, there is no rule of law.

Why is Item Y written on Document X?

Surely the answer to that is the real answer to the original question, isn't it?

And, if one can answer that question, then any question that one is tempted to answer with, "Because it is written on Document X" should instead be answered with the answer to the question, "Why is it written on Document X?"

Otherwise, the question, "Why is it written on Document X?" is sure to be the very next response one gets.

So, why not just provide the real answer to the question the first time it is asked?

[Bluejay]

Hi, Vestig8or.

I think the principle is balance of power.

That's more like what I'm trying to find out. Thank you, Vestig8or.

Now, what is it about States’ Rights that brings about a balance of power?

And, wouldn't Cities’ Rights also provide the same thing?

And, couldn't we go down, and down, and down the bureaucracy, each time citing the principle behind the 10th Amendment to defend our decision that the lower rung on the totem pole should hold the power, and the upper rung should leave that lower rung alone?

It seems to me that the State is an arbitrarily-selected level of the bureaucracy in which to vest power. If the decision is arbitrary, I think there needs to be a demonstration that the State is a superior place for the power to rest. To my knowledge, no such demonstration has really ever been provided.

[Moksha]

Does the church have a plan if all hell were to break loose?

Not sure if the Church has a plan, but I suspect many members would revert to strict constitutionalist mode, which means "stay out of the cross-hairs of the Gatling gun at the entrance of my compound".

:)

[Guest]

Hi, Vestig8or.

That's more like what I'm trying to find out. Thank you, Vestig8or.

Now, what is it about States’ Rights that brings about a balance of power?

And, wouldn't Cities’ Rights also provide the same thing?

And, couldn't we go down, and down, and down the bureaucracy, each time citing the principle behind the 10th Amendment to defend our decision that the lower rung on the totem pole should hold the power, and the upper rung should leave that lower rung alone?

It seems to me that the State is an arbitrarily-selected level of the bureaucracy in which to vest power. If the decision is arbitrary, I think there needs to be a demonstration that the State is a superior place for the power to rest. To my knowledge, no such demonstration has really ever been provided.

It is not necessarily artbitrary... especially for us who sided with the principles of the confederates.

There is a reason you have States. If it was not an appropriate place for power to rest, then you would have been better off as something like the Republic of the Philippines after the Yanks won the war. In the Philippines the governors have regions that do not have their own constitution.

My own demonstration of such superiority (of course, not only am I non-American, I'm super far from expert at this as well) is the ability for Florida to not carry State tax while Georgia has a goodly State tax. Anything lower than the States will require Constitutions for each district/town/municipality/what-have-you which would also require that level of legislative decision-making and enforcement that would cost money. It is micro-management gone haywire.

[InquisitiveSoul]

Hi, InquisitiveSoul

I assume this message was a response to me?

I understand that the Constitution says X and the Yth Amendment says Z.

But, is that really the reason you think the power should be vested in the states?

You have to admit, "because it's written on Document X" is a pretty feeble reason, regardless of what Document X is.

Surely there’s a principle behind it that you support.

You seem rather ignorant as to what the Constitution is and where it came from. I'd suggest you do some research into the document before you begin to trivialize it's Amendments and Inspiration. I suppose if someone tells you they believe in the 10 Commandments because they believe The Bible to be inspired of God you will see that as a feeble reason as well.

If you do have an understanding of what the Consitution truly is then you are playing childish games when you truly fail to see the danger your own rights are in because of the current threats and attacks this great document is under. Your own foolishness is preventing you from being real, say what you mean and cease the silly games.

[MarginOfError]

Hi, MarginOfError.

Why is Item Y written on Document X?

Surely the answer to that is the real answer to the original question, isn't it?

And, if one can answer that question, then any question that one is tempted to answer with, "Because it is written on Document X" should instead be answered with the answer to the question, "Why is it written on Document X?"

Otherwise, the question, "Why is it written on Document X?" is sure to be the very next response one gets.

So, why not just provide the real answer to the question the first time it is asked?

Because the authors chose to put it on Document X is a sufficiently good answer. The point of having recorded law is to have a reference to point to in order to say what is permissible and what isn't. About the only time the question "Why Y written on Document X?" has any relevance is when trying to evaluate if Document X accurately reflects the concepts that the current people want to be governed by. If the answer is no, then it's time to change Document X, not ignore the parts you don't like.

So, in short, because Y is written on Document X is very good reason to adhere to Y. If you don't like Y, your task is to change Document X.