So, I wondered what would lead someone to think that and this is the result I came up with. {I may add more to this later... it still feels unfinished to me.}
Comments?
Wut?
Huh?
Ping! / Thought you might like this.
How can you claim to discuss the Constitution and not address the doctrine of negative rights?
You need to read and learn, not post.
True... How can States be sovereign and be loyal to a “federal” Constitution.. at the same time.. Could be why America cannot figure out whether its a Republic or a Democracy.. even tho a democracy is a political disease that degrades into socialism..
If the U.S. Constitution is to mean anything at all it must be defined by those who have empowered the same to secure their rights.
As individually as possible, given that groups are not the subject of protection for republican governments but rather all the individual members of groups.
The America of my time line is a laboratory example of what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout all histories. A perfect democracy, a "warm body" democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction.... [O]nce a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader — the barbarians enter Rome.(1987)
-Robert A. Heinlein's To Sail Beyond the Sunset