Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tpaine; mrsmith
Good post, but I have to side with mrsmith.

If some amendments say "Congress shall not...", it seems obvious that the founders intended that as a restriction on the U.S. Congress alone, not the state governments.

Other amendments clearly apply to all levels of government.

I chalk this apparent oversight up to political infighting among the founders, many of whom wanted no restrictions on the states.

Aside: Mr. Paine, the way you quote back excerpts from various posts is very confusing. You might want to consider italicizing the quotebacks or using a different font or something. I can't figure out which are the quotes and which is your responses to them.

86 posted on 01/03/2004 4:04:37 AM PST by snopercod (Wishing y'all a prosperous, happy, and FREE new year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: snopercod
If some amendments say "Congress shall not...", it seems obvious that the founders intended that as a restriction on the U.S. Congress alone, not the state governments.

Only the first line of the 1st amendment is so intended. -- Just as Jon Roland explained:
"If we examine the debate in the First Congress more closely, however, it seems clear that the restriction to "Congress" in the article that was to become the First Amendment (when proposed, it was the third) was only intended as a prudential tactic to avoid opposition to its ratification from the many states that then had "establishments of religion", mainly in the form of taxes that were more or less fairly distributed to at least churches of most protestant denominations in the state.
Within a few years after adoption of the Bill of Rights on December 17, 1791, every state that had "established" religion had either adopted their own constitutional amendments disestablishing religion, or simply discontinued the practice. But the language of the First Amendment remained.

Other amendments clearly apply to all levels of government.
I chalk this apparent oversight up to political infighting among the founders, many of whom wanted no restrictions on the states.

Exactly.. -- It makes no sense that the rest of the 1st amendments restrictions on freedom of speech, press, assembly, & petition would appy only to the fed congess.. -- The "right of the people" to assemble is even specified.

Aside: Mr. Paine, the way you quote back excerpts from various posts is very confusing. You might want to consider italicizing the quotebacks or using a different font or something. I can't figure out which are the quotes and which is your responses to them.

Sorry bout that, but I do try to keep every separate post labled by name & number.. -- Html is a clunky system..

87 posted on 01/03/2004 7:27:08 AM PST by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but FRs flying monkey squad brings out me devils. Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson