tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27070282.post8688293526996027519..comments2023-10-30T03:35:39.232-05:00Comments on American Federalist Blog: States' RightsMichael Tamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16861899520031696061noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27070282.post-63866325725020551412009-07-14T06:09:52.984-05:002009-07-14T06:09:52.984-05:00id like to tell Federalism is based on a careful d...id like to tell Federalism is based on a careful division of power between the national government and state governments, ,,,<br /><br /><br />_______________<br />victor<br />https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=15157126&postID=112332688139075420&page=1&isPopup=truAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27070282.post-72726988661036270692007-08-25T22:40:00.000-05:002007-08-25T22:40:00.000-05:00First of all, thanks for the comment.Dave, you're ...First of all, thanks for the comment.<BR/><BR/>Dave, you're to be excused for misreading me because there's a lot of background that goes into my position. <BR/><BR/>Let me re-state: I think relegating abortion "to the States" is "forfeit by Federalism." I don't think it is an issue that can be permanently resolved by letting the States decide, although I acknowledge that if that's where the majority of Americans are at on the issue, it is astute of Romney to recognize that and accept a minor victory. Is there a moral difference between letting the States decide abortion and letting the States decide owning slaves? Or euthanizing everyone over 70?<BR/><BR/>My philosophical underpinning is simply the laws of Nature and Nature's God - the spirit captured in our Declaration of Independence. Inasmuch as people are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights - rights that can't be transferred or taken from one class of persons and given to another - and that among these rights are LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, abortion is inconsistent with reason and the laws of Nature and Nature's God. This is why I indicated that Romney is to the left of me on this issue. I take a DoI-centric approach: government at any and every level is charged with the protection of the inalienable rights of its people. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.<BR/><BR/>I find socialists to be peculiar creatures. I read some of the comments on your blog, and I couldn't help but note the references to "race", especially in your post on immigration. It appears that cultural, as well as economic, Marxists have cornered the market on failed ideas. I'm curious if you consider yourself one or the other?<BR/><BR/>If I lived to be a thousand years old, I'd never understand the logical gymnastics a socialist must go through to argue that businesses oppress the poor workers of the world, while at the same time holding the belief that people aren't entitled to the fruits of their labor (which is really what socialism is about). You might not like free markets because they're not "fair" but at least in the free market a person is entitled to the fruits of their labor.<BR/><BR/>-MT<BR/><BR/>P.S. You're welcome to visit and hang around... but I can't say I'd recommend it. While my fellow travelers aren't as frequent in their postings here, they're likely to be a little less gentle than I am in correcting certain types of "thinking."Michael Tamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16861899520031696061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27070282.post-21039983002165659492007-08-25T20:02:00.000-05:002007-08-25T20:02:00.000-05:00I too am a federalist (albeit of a different varie...I too am a federalist (albeit of a different variety) and unlike many of those similar to myself, I agree with you on the issue of abortion being a matter of state's rights. Federalism is based on a careful division of power between the national government and state governments, and this is an issue which should be evaluated on a more specific level.MC Fanonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04966360672502646830noreply@blogger.com