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

To: Yeti
"what people do who *like* it a little TOO much is to pretend the phrase "general welfare of the United States" actually says "specific welfare of each of the people" and pretend to believe that the Founding Fathers intended to create a Borg state."

Yawn...

Are you completely dismissing *any* meaning from the general welfare phrase in our Constitution, or are you one of the last 3 intellectually honest libertarians willing to actually post the *specific* meaning that you ascribe to the phrase "general welfare"?

23 posted on 04/06/2003 4:13:43 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: Southack
Wouldn't reading in the "general welfare clause" as you and all leftists do make the central governments constitutional powers UNlimited? I thought the constitution limited the powers of the central government but I can't think of one single federal program, real or imagined, that wouldn't come under the all encompassing "general welfare clause". Can you?

And when after painstakingly listing the powers granted to the central government (such as provide post roads, coining money, etc.) then saying "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers ", did you think the foregoing powers means all the ones specifically listed and any other power under the sun? I don't think so either. Maybe you should reconsider.

32 posted on 04/06/2003 5:00:51 PM PDT by Gumption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: Southack
willing to actually post the *specific* meaning that you ascribe to the phrase "general welfare"?

I have not asserted an inerpretation of its meaning, you have(albeit by insinuation). I have refuted your implication by pointing out that the meaning of the words you quoted is not as you imply.

"General welfare of the United States" does not equal making sure Jane Doe gets a check every month. In fact, it does not even say "general welfare of the People of the United States."

Just the welfare(meaning well-being) of the nation, not "welfare" as recently redefined to mean money for poor people. The word didn't even have that meaning when the document was composed.

If you want a hint, both this and the interstate commerce clause are more appropriately applicable to things like interstate highways and maybe meteorological sevices, things like that. Things which contribute to the general welfare of the nation.

33 posted on 04/06/2003 5:04:15 PM PDT by Yeti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | 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