Posted on 01/09/2015 8:46:34 AM PST by MosesKnows
IOW, they only played at reading it.
Because that section was rescinded with the passing of the amendments (I think 13 or 14.)
That means, when reading the Constitution, you can and should literally skip that portion.
The Preamble is not part of the Constitution, just as a forward to a book is not part of the book.
OK. Now can they follow it?
I did not know the Preamble had not been ratified. That being the case, seems to me the “general welfare “”clause”” has no legal standing and all statutes based upon it, including court decisions are null and void.
“Promote the general welfare” is an absolutely fine idea. It simply means broad brush, create a society where people prosper. There is not a need to avoid the phrase.
And it does not mean provide the livelihood to individuals.
Promote general welfare means, have a functioning court system. Establish money. Protect rights.
That is all it ever meant until the socialists came in
That was my mistake.
The Preamble to the Constitution was ratified and the 114th Congress read it.
I was referring to the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, which was not ratified.
I defy you to find a copy of the Constitution that does not include the language before the amendment and the amendment; else, how you would know what was amended.
Too bad, I had hoped we had stumbled onto the path to castrate the imperial federal apparatus.
When were amendments 9 & 10 rescinded?
Did they read all of Art. II, Sect. 1?
So they read the Constitution. A lot of people read the Bible. That doesn’t mean they follow it.
““Promote the general welfare” is an absolutely fine idea. It simply means broad brush, create a society where people prosper.”
“general welfare” is another translation of the res publica: the public riches, the common wealth, the common good, the public good, the general good.
Therefore, the meaning of the clause is that one of the reasons “We the People” ordained the Constitution, was to promote good, or welfare, of all, of the public.
“I defy you to find a copy of the Constitution that does not include the language before the amendment and the amendment; else, how you would know what was amended.”
I’ve seen Constitution copies where the amended sections are in brackets, or italics. So they just skip over those sections, and the amendments fill in those gaps.
Is it not crossed out? Does it usually not indicate that it was rescinded?
That means, when reading it, that it is no longer valid.
So, if you are reading aloud it means to skip it. I am referring to the process of public speaking, not the written document.
It’s not really worth discussing, as you and I will not agree about the process. But in terms of giving a proper speech, they did it correctly. Whether or not you like it is a matter of opinion.
Where did I suggest they were?
Oh, you didn’t, but it seems that all the people who get to the federal level seem to think they’ve been repealed.
Ok. I understand.
They read this aloud like it means anything to them.
And this afternoon the emails go out trying to get $5 and $10 from the Red White and Blue citizens.
But tonight, the oligarchs will throw them a “time” and shovel bags of cash to them
Having these clowns reading the Constitution is more insulting than inspiring.
"The United States Constitution contains two references to "the General Welfare", one occurring in the Preamble and the other in the Taxing and Spending Clause. The U.S. Supreme Court has held the mention of the clause in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution "has never been regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government of the United States or on any of its Departments." - Wikipedia
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.