The Constitution and Freedom

[blahblahblah]

does the constitution say you cannot have such a tax? It doesn’t mention sales taxes or motor vehicle licensing fees either…

Those are state taxes. Remember the 10th amendment…

[blahblahblah]

The video shows a picture of Jesus and a Christian cross when it mentions that natural law is based upon God.

That could definitely be misleading. The concept he was trying to get across was that our rights are natural and “given by God.” For atheists, just say “inherent to all people”. This is an important distinction, because many governments “give” rights to people. If they can give them of course, they can take them away as well. Here in the US, our Constitution recognizes that our rights are inherent. They are not given to us by a man or a government; we have them because we are human beings.

[blahblahblah]

The video shows a picture of Jesus and a Christian cross when it mentions that natural law is based upon God.

That could definitely be misleading. The concept he was trying to get across was that our rights are natural and “given by God.” For atheists, just say “inherent to all people”. This is an important distinction, because many governments “give” rights to people. If they can give them of course, they can take them away as well. Here in the US, our Constitution recognizes that our rights are inherent. They are not given to us by a man or a government; we have them because we are human beings.

[blahblahblah]

The video shows a picture of Jesus and a Christian cross when it mentions that natural law is based upon God.

That could definitely be misleading. The concept he was trying to get across was that our rights are natural and “given by God.” For atheists, just say “inherent to all people”. This is an important distinction, because many governments “give” rights to people. If they can give them of course, they can take them away as well. Here in the US, our Constitution recognizes that our rights are inherent. They are not given to us by a man or a government; we have them because we are human beings.

[blahblahblah]

The video shows a picture of Jesus and a Christian cross when it mentions that natural law is based upon God.

That could definitely be misleading. The concept he was trying to get across was that our rights are natural and “given by God.” For atheists, just say “inherent to all people”. This is an important distinction, because many governments “give” rights to people. If they can give them of course, they can take them away as well. Here in the US, our Constitution recognizes that our rights are inherent. They are not given to us by a man or a government; we have them because we are human beings.

[blahblahblah]

The video shows a picture of Jesus and a Christian cross when it mentions that natural law is based upon God.

That could definitely be misleading. The concept he was trying to get across was that our rights are natural and “given by God.” For atheists, just say “inherent to all people”. This is an important distinction, because many governments “give” rights to people. If they can give them of course, they can take them away as well. Here in the US, our Constitution recognizes that our rights are inherent. They are not given to us by a man or a government; we have them because we are human beings.

[Arraya]

[quote=CONCHO]I’m having a hard time thinking of examples of any Constitutional questions based upon the need to “protect me from things like global warming or evil corporations.”

Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. Very soon we will all be paying this tax, which of course won’t do a thing to stop global warming but will simply further enrich those at the very top.

And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Then, you might refashion you argument to say evil corporations trick uninformed liberals into disregarding the constitution, if in fact those two measures are unconstitutional. In which case, the protection from said evil corporations is really more predation under the guise of protection.

[Arraya]

[quote=CONCHO]I’m having a hard time thinking of examples of any Constitutional questions based upon the need to “protect me from things like global warming or evil corporations.”

Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. Very soon we will all be paying this tax, which of course won’t do a thing to stop global warming but will simply further enrich those at the very top.

And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Then, you might refashion you argument to say evil corporations trick uninformed liberals into disregarding the constitution, if in fact those two measures are unconstitutional. In which case, the protection from said evil corporations is really more predation under the guise of protection.

[Arraya]

[quote=CONCHO]I’m having a hard time thinking of examples of any Constitutional questions based upon the need to “protect me from things like global warming or evil corporations.”

Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. Very soon we will all be paying this tax, which of course won’t do a thing to stop global warming but will simply further enrich those at the very top.

And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Then, you might refashion you argument to say evil corporations trick uninformed liberals into disregarding the constitution, if in fact those two measures are unconstitutional. In which case, the protection from said evil corporations is really more predation under the guise of protection.

[Arraya]

[quote=CONCHO]I’m having a hard time thinking of examples of any Constitutional questions based upon the need to “protect me from things like global warming or evil corporations.”

Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. Very soon we will all be paying this tax, which of course won’t do a thing to stop global warming but will simply further enrich those at the very top.

And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Then, you might refashion you argument to say evil corporations trick uninformed liberals into disregarding the constitution, if in fact those two measures are unconstitutional. In which case, the protection from said evil corporations is really more predation under the guise of protection.

[Arraya]

[quote=CONCHO]I’m having a hard time thinking of examples of any Constitutional questions based upon the need to “protect me from things like global warming or evil corporations.”

Okay, how about the coming Carbon tax? I don’t recall the Constitution giving congress the power to levy taxes on breathing or burning fuel. Very soon we will all be paying this tax, which of course won’t do a thing to stop global warming but will simply further enrich those at the very top.

And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

Then, you might refashion you argument to say evil corporations trick uninformed liberals into disregarding the constitution, if in fact those two measures are unconstitutional. In which case, the protection from said evil corporations is really more predation under the guise of protection.

[jpinpb]

[quote=CONCHO]And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

This is something with which I take issue. I understand there are many other countries out there, such as Canada and Italy, which cover their citizens w/national healthcare. Healthcare – not insurance!

In fact, in Italy, if you want extra coverage, better, additional medical care, then you go out and get medical insurance, for medical coverage above and beyond that provided by the government.

There is NO requirement or obligation in those countries that you purchase insurance for medical care. Sure, I’m figuring that the national medical coverage is most likely paid for by taxes as most government programs are. And sure, their taxes are probably higher. I am not disputing any of that, nor whether it is right or wrong.

My contention is our government trying to promote national healthcare, but it is, in effect, indirectly sponsoring private companies – insurance. Private insurance companies have one objective – to make money.

If we are hell bent on having national health insurance coverage, then might as well just set it up like SS or Medicare. Not claiming whether those are great and successful programs, but at least they are not a private business for profit.

[jpinpb]

[quote=CONCHO]And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

This is something with which I take issue. I understand there are many other countries out there, such as Canada and Italy, which cover their citizens w/national healthcare. Healthcare – not insurance!

In fact, in Italy, if you want extra coverage, better, additional medical care, then you go out and get medical insurance, for medical coverage above and beyond that provided by the government.

There is NO requirement or obligation in those countries that you purchase insurance for medical care. Sure, I’m figuring that the national medical coverage is most likely paid for by taxes as most government programs are. And sure, their taxes are probably higher. I am not disputing any of that, nor whether it is right or wrong.

My contention is our government trying to promote national healthcare, but it is, in effect, indirectly sponsoring private companies – insurance. Private insurance companies have one objective – to make money.

If we are hell bent on having national health insurance coverage, then might as well just set it up like SS or Medicare. Not claiming whether those are great and successful programs, but at least they are not a private business for profit.

[jpinpb]

[quote=CONCHO]And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

This is something with which I take issue. I understand there are many other countries out there, such as Canada and Italy, which cover their citizens w/national healthcare. Healthcare – not insurance!

In fact, in Italy, if you want extra coverage, better, additional medical care, then you go out and get medical insurance, for medical coverage above and beyond that provided by the government.

There is NO requirement or obligation in those countries that you purchase insurance for medical care. Sure, I’m figuring that the national medical coverage is most likely paid for by taxes as most government programs are. And sure, their taxes are probably higher. I am not disputing any of that, nor whether it is right or wrong.

My contention is our government trying to promote national healthcare, but it is, in effect, indirectly sponsoring private companies – insurance. Private insurance companies have one objective – to make money.

If we are hell bent on having national health insurance coverage, then might as well just set it up like SS or Medicare. Not claiming whether those are great and successful programs, but at least they are not a private business for profit.

[jpinpb]

[quote=CONCHO]And of course there will be the miracle of government healthcare to protect us all from evil health insurance companies. Never mind that the evil health insurance companies will be the ones administering the system, the government will just be there to force you to purchase their worthless product.[/quote]

This is something with which I take issue. I understand there are many other countries out there, such as Canada and Italy, which cover their citizens w/national healthcare. Healthcare – not insurance!

In fact, in Italy, if you want extra coverage, better, additional medical care, then you go out and get medical insurance, for medical coverage above and beyond that provided by the government.

There is NO requirement or obligation in those countries that you purchase insurance for medical care. Sure, I’m figuring that the national medical coverage is most likely paid for by taxes as most government programs are. And sure, their taxes are probably higher. I am not disputing any of that, nor whether it is right or wrong.

My contention is our government trying to promote national healthcare, but it is, in effect, indirectly sponsoring private companies – insurance. Private insurance companies have one objective – to make money.

If we are hell bent on having national health insurance coverage, then might as well just set it up like SS or Medicare. Not claiming whether those are great and successful programs, but at least they are not a private business for profit.

[Author]

Posts