Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
One of it's delineated powers is passing laws as needed.
AS NEEDED? How many of the laws that they pass would honestly fit this description?
As many as needed. How many automobile driving laws did America need in 1800? Should we abolish driving laws because there were none in 1800?AS NEEDED? How many of the laws that they pass would honestly fit this description?
As many as needed. How many automobile driving laws did America need in 1800? Should we abolish driving laws because there were none in 1800?
You dont know of any federal driving laws?What kind of point are you trying to make here? I don't know of any federal driving laws, but if there are any, my hope is that they would be needed at present even if they weren't needed in the past but my experience tells me that there would be many more laws about driving that were not needed than laws that were needed. What relevance the year 1800 has escapes me completely.
I disagree. I believe the legislation passes laws because there is a need for the laws. They aren't just passing laws to keep busyI think my point was that most of the laws congress passes are not needed at the present time. It seems that Congresspersons feel they need to pass laws because it is in their job description and they must feel like they are not earning their pay if legislation is not passed. It really doesn't seem to matter what the legislation is as long as they "get something done". Heck, they don't even have to know what is a the bill to pass it.
Once again, these states have spent and spent and spent and spent and spent and spent and are blue. They represent the failed policy of the tax and spend democrat party.
So why not cut off federal funds to all the states, not just the blue ones?
OH sure it has something to do with relationships between the states. It's a fact that red states take more money than they put in. I imagine if they got a more fair share, their budget wouldn't be so great, and if the blue states got more back from what they put in, theirs might be a little better.
You can try and ignore the issue, but the fact of the matter is red states are benefitting more from blue states. Not unlike Kermit's brother analogy.
One of it's delineated powers is passing laws as needed.
Some countries in south america operate with no driving laws and their accident and fatality rates are way lower than ours. YOu seem to be under the impression that laws actually protect people. They don't, laws are created to control people.As many as needed. How many automobile driving laws did America need in 1800? Should we abolish driving laws because there were none in 1800?
Some countries in south america operate with no driving laws and their accident and fatality rates are way lower than ours. YOu seem to be under the impression that laws actually protect people. They don't, laws are created to control people.
No Can you name some.You dont know of any federal driving laws?
and how is that in any way relevant to the discussion? I don't recall claiming that laws are never needed or that all the needed laws are already in place. Your argument addresses a point I have not made just as many of the laws Congress passes address problems that don't exist.I guess the point did escape you. The point is there were no automobile laws in 1800 because there were no automobiles. When cars came around, then so did the laws. Laws are made as they are needed.
I believe differently and cite the fact that Congresspersons are continually voting to pass legislation that they have never read and don't understand yet they don't seem to be embarrassed by that fact at all. So the mere fact that they have passed legislation seems to be more important to them than what is actually contained within the laws they pass.I disagree. I believe the legislation passes laws because there is a need for the laws. They aren't just passing laws to keep busy
I canNo Can you name some.
I answered, IMO, the question in post# 41and how is that in any way relevant to the discussion? I don't recall claiming that laws are never needed or that all the needed laws are already in place. Your argument addresses a point I have not made just as many of the laws Congress passes address problems that don't exist.
Never reading the legislation does not mean they do not know what is in the bill. Your logic is flawed.I believe differently and cite the fact that Congresspersons are continually voting to pass legislation that they have never read and don't understand yet they don't seem to be embarrassed by that fact at all. So the mere fact that they have passed legislation seems to be more important to them than what is actually contained within the laws they pass.
How can something be protected without exerting some kind of control? You seem to be under the impression that you know something I don't.Some countries in south america operate with no driving laws and their accident and fatality rates are way lower than ours. YOu seem to be under the impression that laws actually protect people. They don't, laws are created to control people.
We are the most litigious and soon to be regulated and controlled body politic on the planet, and yet we are no safer here with all the burdensome laws, statutes, codes, orders, and mandates than some farmer in Costa Rica who rarely if ever gives thought to the government and vice versa. As I said, government (by way of law) is "supposed" to exist to protect life and liberty, not control it.How can something be protected without exerting some kind of control? You seem to be under the impression that you know something I don't.
We are the most litigious and soon to be regulated and controlled body politic on the planet, and yet we are no safer here with all the burdensome laws, statutes, codes, orders, and mandates than some farmer in Costa Rica who rarely if ever gives thought to the government and vice versa. As I said, government (by way of law) is "supposed" to exist to protect life and liberty, not control it.
I see life as a division between 2 kinds of people, those who love freedom and liberty, and those who love power and control. Which one are you? You can't be both. You either favor freedom or you favor power. You either want liberty or you want control.
I am sorry that you feel the need for a government to make decisions for you.lol's
You are either with us or against us.
(Apparently, somebody thinks that everybody would just get along without control)
Will you? I would like to know someI can
"AS NEEDED? How many of the laws that they pass would honestly fit this description?" How does the year 1800 relate to this question? The invention of the auto may have necessitated new laws but that doesn't address the larger point.I answered, IMO, the question in post# 41
Never reading the legislation does not mean they do not know what is in the bill. Your logic is flawed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?