Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 So, you believe you know better about James Madison's intent than: 1. Constitutional law experts (it doesn't exist in a vacuum) 2. SCOTUS 3. James Madison It is not my opinion against your opinion. It is your opinion against those listed above. Absolutely! It is a very straight forward document written in plain english. The writings of the founding fathers are quite clear in their intent behind the constitution as well. Those who claim to be the elite few who can understand the Constitution are twisting words and meanings to fill their own agendas. "General welfare", or the fifth Amendment that has been twisted to produce eminent domain, for example. It is a simple document to understand if you understand the principles upon which it was built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 I think the horse is dead. :) We're going in circles. I'm glad that it this has been a plesant exchange and i've learned a lot from you all. it's nice to gain understanding of other views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Goldwater Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 :rofl: You make me laugh, Barry. As always, glad to be of service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Florida. Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 No, I've only read the constitution. Article 1, Section 2, and Amendment IV. Then I compared it to the American Community Survey and came to the conclusion on my own that it's unconstitutional. Again, to me at least, legal doesn't equal constitutional. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. :) That's the Supreme Court's job. Citizens don't get to decide what is constitutional and what isn't. If we believe something is unconstitutional we can bring it to court and hope the SCOTUS will take the case if it makes it that far. But we aren't the SCOTUS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 Citizens don't get to decide what is constitutional and what isn't. And SCOTUS isn't supposed to make laws, but they do anyway. :tongue_smilie: As a citizen, I do decide what is constitutional and what isn't, but I understand what you're saying as well. They are the official interpreters of the Constitution. I just think they are sometimes wrong in their interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shea Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 And SCOTUS isn't supposed to make laws, but they do anyway. :tongue_smilie: As a citizen, I do decide what is constitutional and what isn't, but I understand what you're saying as well. They are the official interpreters of the Constitution. I just think they are sometimes wrong in their interpretation. And the current POTUS would agree with you about the SCOTUS sometimes being wrong in their interpretations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 (edited) And the current POTUS would agree with you about the SCOTUS sometimes being wrong in their interpretations. :lol: me and the POTUS would agree about something? Wait, now here's something that has been surprising in this conversation to me. Do YOU (or Mrs. Mungo, or anyone) ever disagree with the Supreme Court's rulings on the constitution? Or do you just assume they are correct, since they are the experts? Edited April 25, 2011 by hmsmith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shea Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 :lol: me and the POTUS would agree about something? :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 i edited it... continue reading! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shea Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 :lol: me and the POTUS would agree about something? Wait, now here's something that has been surprising in this conversation to me. Do YOU (or Mrs. Mungo, or anyone) ever disagree with the Supreme Court's rulings on the constitution? Or do you just assume they are correct, since they are the experts? Yes, I sometimes do disagree with the SCOTUS rulings. Heck, the judges don't even agree with each other!:tongue_smilie:Even though James Madison is considered the "Father of the Constitution", I don't always agree with him either. :blush: (I tend to favor the anti-Federalists over the Federalists.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 So, James Madison was the main author of the constitution. He was the first president under which economic survey questions were asked in order to determine the manufacturing capabilities of the nation. You're saying that he was wrong to do that because it is unconstitutional? We are at in impasse of logical conclusions. I withdraw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann.without.an.e Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I have not read the replies, sorry there are just too many. We also received what they call The American Community Survey in lieu of a census. Some people just get a census and some get the wonderful ACS. We were winner too :confused: I filled out the number of people and a few other non-descrip answers and sent it in. I didn't fill the whole thing out. I felt that it was a huge invasion of my privacy. When my DH left for work and how long it took him to get there? There were a crazy amount of questions on that thing. I stressed over it, but in the end I did what I thought was the best thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I have not read the replies, sorry there are just too many. We also received what they call The American Community Survey in lieu of a census. Some people just get a census and some get the wonderful ACS. We were winner too :confused: I filled out the number of people and a few other non-descrip answers and sent it in. I didn't fill the whole thing out. I felt that it was a huge invasion of my privacy. When my DH left for work and how long it took him to get there? There were a crazy amount of questions on that thing. I stressed over it, but in the end I did what I thought was the best thing. http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2655618&postcount=13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoutTN Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Too fishy. A scam, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmoira Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Too fishy. A scam, I think.*facepalm* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 So, James Madison was the main author of the constitution. He was the first president under which economic survey questions were asked in order to determine the manufacturing capabilities of the nation. You're saying that he was wrong to do that because it is unconstitutional? We are at in impasse of logical conclusions. I withdraw. NO. James Madison didn't do anything unconstitutional by surveying manufacturing establishments. The link you provided on the topic is wonderful: http://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/index_of_questions/1810_1.html It shows clearly when the inappropriate and unconstitutional census began. 1940. FDR. Hmmmmmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 (edited) NO. James Madison didn't do anything unconstitutional by surveying manufacturing establishments. The link you provided on the topic is wonderful: http://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/index_of_questions/1810_1.html It shows clearly when the inappropriate and unconstitutional census began. 1940. FDR. Hmmmmmm... The 1890 Census is pretty detailed. http://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/index_of_questions/1890_1.html Congress can have whatever they want on the Census. They can ask "How many Cheezits did your family eat in the past ten years?" and it wouldn't be Unconsitutional. Article 1, Section 2: "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct." Say my dh asks, "What do you want for dinner?" and I said, "Oh I don't care, you decide." That means he gets to decide. I wouldn't suddenly be "Haha! Takebacks! We're eating Johnny Carinos!" If I don't like his suggestion. They have that power because WE give it to them. Edited April 25, 2011 by Sis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 Wait, now here's something that has been surprising in this conversation to me. Do YOU (or Mrs. Mungo, or anyone) ever disagree with the Supreme Court's rulings on the constitution? Or do you just assume they are correct, since they are the experts? I'm still at a loss when people say something is constitutional just because the Supreme Court ruled it so. That's not MY definition of constitutional. Something is constitutional when it agrees with what is written in the Constitution and is upheld by the same principles of liberty that the Founding Fathers wrote it on. You're right in saying Congress can have whatever they want on the census... does that not strike you as wrong? :confused: Where is your right of privacy if that is the case? You would gladly just hand that over? I feel like I live on a different planet than some of you. I don't mean that to be rude; I just don't understand you, I guess. That frame of mind is just so odd to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 They have that power because WE give it to them. Yes, how easily we give up our freedoms and how difficult it is to take them back once they're gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Yes, how easily we give up our freedoms and how difficult it is to take them back once they're gone. Do you mean when that power was granted to Congress over 200 years ago?? Because that is what I meant. We are "The People" and *we* give Congress their powers. But "we" did that over 200 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Has anyone here being paranoid about the Census actually dug through old census records for their family members? I never actually thought "papers please" I thought "WOW!!! THAT'S COOL!! My g-g-g-g-grandparent signed that!!!" This whole "papers please" thing is just foreign to my American History loving ears. I have always thought the whole Census process was pretty cool. I see it as a civic duty like voting or sitting on a jury. It is completely foreign to me that some people would be "OMG!! They asked how many bathrooms I have!!" So?? They may also ask you how many bathrooms you have if you sit on a jury if they want and that is also required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinkInTheBlue Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Do you mean when that power was granted to Congress over 200 years ago?? Because that is what I meant. We are "The People" and *we* give Congress their powers. But "we" did that over 200 years ago. No, "they" did, not "me". Just because it might have been given 200 years ago doesn't make it right. There wasn't any kind of perfection just because it was actually written in the beginning. Giving congress power and then having a ridiculous congress doesn't make it right. "I" didn't give congress the power and wouldn't if I could have been there. :) I also received this big, bulky envelope and I actually resent the "Your response is required by law". My husband is of the "do not return it" camp and I'm undecided. I certainly feel it's an invasion of my privacy and don't appreciate the demand. What happens when everyone just keeps doing whatever they are told? Where does it stop? Patriot Act anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommymilkies Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Sounds like a scam. Oddly enough, I was offered a census job (declined because of morning sickness), but they never actually came to our house for our info... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 Do you mean when that power was granted to Congress over 200 years ago?? Because that is what I meant. We are "The People" and *we* give Congress their powers. But "we" did that over 200 years ago. No, I do not mean when we gave Congress their powers, nor do I mean that the people should rule like a democracy. A republic is what we have: we elect those that make the decisions. We NEED a federal government. We give up our freedoms when we are careless of who we vote into office. We give up our freedoms when we aren't paying attention to what is going on in politics, when we become apathetic towards the process, and when we become uneducated concerning the principles upon which liberty thrives and which principles take away liberty. Read The Law, by Frederic Bastiat. It's online and is easy to read and clear to understand. Read The 5000 Year Leap to understand the principles of our Founding Fathers. He doesn't do a good job referencing, so you'll have to google to find out if what he says is true. It was an eye opener. How easy it is to recognize when freedom has been crossed after reading these books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 No, "they" did, not "me". Just because it might have been given 200 years ago doesn't make it right. There wasn't any kind of perfection just because it was actually written in the beginning. Giving congress power and then having a ridiculous congress doesn't make it right. "I" didn't give congress the power and wouldn't if I could have been there. :) I also received this big, bulky envelope and I actually resent the "Your response is required by law". My husband is of the "do not return it" camp and I'm undecided. I certainly feel it's an invasion of my privacy and don't appreciate the demand. What happens when everyone just keeps doing whatever they are told? Where does it stop? Patriot Act anyone? You cannot ignore the laws because you don't like who is in charge. :confused: You give someone that power everytime you vote for them for Congress. That is one of their powers. They have it. If you don't like it, run for Congress and take it away. :confused: Patriot Act is a new thing....the first Census was before we were even a country. :confused: "We the people" was never intended to just mean "those guys over 200 years ago" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 (edited) No, I do not mean when we gave Congress their powers, nor do I mean that the people should rule like a democracy. A republic is what we have: we elect those that make the decisions. We NEED a federal government. We give up our freedoms when we are careless of who we vote into office. We give up our freedoms when we aren't paying attention to what is going on in politics, when we become apathetic towards the process, and when we become uneducated concerning the principles upon which liberty thrives and which principles take away liberty. Read The Law, by Frederic Bastiat. It's online and is easy to read and clear to understand. Read The 5000 Year Leap to understand the principles of our Founding Fathers. He doesn't do a good job referencing, so you'll have to google to find out if what he says is true. It was an eye opener. How easy it is to recognize when freedom has been crossed after reading these books. I know we have a Republic. You did just say you didn't care what the Constitution says because you didn't like the Congress that was in session at the time. I actually think the Constitution applies no matter what Congress is in session. We don't agree about politicians. I am not going to vote for people who are paranoid about the census and don't want to pay taxes. That is just not going to happen. I don't want to read books written by crazies. Edited April 25, 2011 by Sis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 (edited) I'm still at a loss when people say something is constitutional just because the Supreme Court ruled it so. That's not MY definition of constitutional. Something is constitutional when it agrees with what is written in the Constitution and is upheld by the same principles of liberty that the Founding Fathers wrote it on. You're right in saying Congress can have whatever they want on the census... does that not strike you as wrong? :confused: Where is your right of privacy if that is the case? You would gladly just hand that over? I feel like I live on a different planet than some of you. I don't mean that to be rude; I just don't understand you, I guess. That frame of mind is just so odd to me. Whether or not I like the questions *is not relevant* to whether it is *constitutional*. They CANNOT be unconstitutional because the constitution very specifically gives Congress the right to ask whatever questions they please. If you don't like that fact, then you need to lobby for a constitutional amendment limiting their powers. OR talk to your elected officials about it. Yes, I think if you can make the logical jump of "I think the questions are personal therefore they are unconstitutional," we do live on different planets. NO. James Madison didn't do anything unconstitutional by surveying manufacturing establishments. Why is there any difference between individuals and manufacturers? Especially in the days before the industrial revolution? It shows clearly when the inappropriate and unconstitutional census began. Inappropriate according to whom, exactly? Some of the questions people *on this very thread* have complained about appeared in some form as early as 1850. 1940. FDR. Hmmmmmm...Hmmmm? What does that mean? I won't debate implications because people tend to backtrack. eta: I suggest you read The Federalist Papers or maybe a basic civics book. Edited April 25, 2011 by Mrs Mungo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 "We the people" was never intended to just mean "those guys over 200 years ago" :iagree: We the people is us, always. If you don't like a power that the constitution gives then you lobby for change, it's still you. Changes in the constitution have been many. I get counted by the census now, some of my ancestors were not. We have no more slavery. Women get to vote. If you feel strongly about something, change it. Otherwise, you are still the people. I think some people are being deceived by how our government actually works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MischiefManaged Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I think some people are being deceived by how our government actually works. well, you also have some people who understand Very Well how our government is 'actually' working,how it was intended to work, and why we created our own gvt to begin with. Some of us are expecting History to come full circle. eta: I suggest you read The Federalist Papers or maybe a basic civics book. don't forget the anti-Federalist papers. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 well, you also have some people who understand Very Well how our government is 'actually' working,how it was intended to work, and why we created our own gvt to begin with. As far as the census goes, it is working as it was intended to work. Congress (as representatives of we the people) writes the questions and the census bureau conducts the census. Some of us are expecting History to come full circle. Meaning? Again, I won't debate things people imply, it's too easy for people to give a "oh, dear, that is not what I meant," answer when they are called on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 don't forget the anti-Federalist papers. :) I have read both. The system we have is very middle of the road as far as what the two sides wanted and as far as developed countries go today. Have you ever traveled in a second or third world country? I don't want to live in one of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MischiefManaged Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 As far as the census goes, it is working as it was intended to work. Congress (as representatives of we the people) writes the questions and the census bureau conducts the census. and some of The People disagree, based on the reason given for the census in the Constitution. Meaning? Again, I won't debate things people imply, it's too easy for people to give a "oh, dear, that is not what I meant," answer when they are called on it. meaning.... that many of us who have read history further back than our founding documents expect a need for another Declaration of Independence. Part of understanding government means understanding how and why governments have failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Some of us are expecting History to come full circle. You mean another Civil War? I am growing really tired of these implications of impending violence. Should we all REALLY be stockpiling weapons?? I don't want to live in the world some people want to create. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 and some of The People disagree, based on the reason given for the census in the Constitution. Again, when the census was used to determine the manufacturing capabilities of the country under the presidency of James Madison with founding fathers as members of Congress writing those questions, it becomes clear that they intended more than that. meaning.... that many of us who have read history further back than our founding documents expect a need for another Declaration of Independence. Part of understanding government means understanding how and why governments have failed. Because why? What is happening that you are so against? How are you not being represented? Maybe some areas would be better represented if they answered the census. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 edited because I can't do it. Going to dinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmoira Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Maybe some areas would be better represented if they answered the census. :lol:Darn! You caught me in mid-sip with that one. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoPlaceLikeHome Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 (edited) and some of The People disagree, based on the reason given for the census in the Constitution. meaning.... that many of us who have read history further back than our founding documents expect a need for another Declaration of Independence. Part of understanding government means understanding how and why governments have failed. If a group of people or a state wants secession, then hopefully they are prepared for what that fully means:D I am sure the rest of the US would be happy to cut off all federal funds for such a state and put up a wall around said state. Then, of course, the residents of said state would need visas and passports to come visit the US if the US even allows it. Said state would have to have their own defenses. Said state would have to have their own air traffic controllers and no guarantee of the right to fly over US airspace or guarantee to of access to ports of entry. Said state would get no more education or transportation funds. Also if waterways that supply water do not originate in said state, then I guess there is no guarantee that the US would allow the waterway to flow into said state. They would have to have trade agreements and so on. If people don't like our Congress, then vote IMHO:D Edited April 25, 2011 by priscilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoPlaceLikeHome Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Again, when the census was used to determine the manufacturing capabilities of the country under the presidency of James Madison with founding fathers as members of Congress writing those questions, it becomes clear that they intended more than that. Because why? What is happening that you are so against? How are you not being represented? Maybe some areas would be better represented if they answered the census. :lol: :iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree::lol::lol::lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 They CANNOT be unconstitutional because the constitution very specifically gives Congress the right to ask whatever questions they please. Please, please provide a reference here. We're talking about the Constitution of the United States right? Not a Supreme court ruling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoPlaceLikeHome Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 (edited) Here is a breakdown of much aid from the feds each state receives:D http://www.brookings.edu/metro/census_states.aspx Edited April 25, 2011 by priscilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 Because why? What is happening that you are so against? How are you not being represented? Maybe some areas would be better represented if they answered the census. :lol: I'm not concerned about getting my "fair share" :001_smile: I'm concerned about my rights being protected. That is the purpose of govenrment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MischiefManaged Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 You mean another Civil War? I am growing really tired of these implications of impending violence. Should we all REALLY be stockpiling weapons?? I don't want to live in the world some people want to create. yeah, i grew tired reading alll those histories of violence too. But i'd be an idiot to think we're headed to a peaceful utopia. There's a lot of modern worlds people want to create that i don't want to live in either. ;) eta: dh says "impending violence?" what about current violence? Again, when the census was used to determine the manufacturing capabilities of the country under the presidency of James Madison with founding fathers as members of Congress writing those questions, it becomes clear that they intended more than that. sure. get the thing passed, take control, and start tweaking 'intentions.' Ever read Animal Farm? Because why? What is happening that you are so against? How are you not being represented? Maybe some areas would be better represented if they answered the census. :lol: :confused: You don't really think it would just be about 'not being represented' do you? There's a LOT going on socially and fiscally that people are incredibly upset with. There's no way we'd be able to address them all in this thread, but I'm going to tread lightly and assume [dangerously?] that you are well aware of the seriousness of the manymanymany issues we have had for years. enjoy your dinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Please, please provide a reference here. We're talking about the Constitution of the United States right? Not a Supreme court ruling? Yes, it is in the Constitution. Article 1, Section 2: "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MischiefManaged Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 If a group of people or a state wants secession, then hopefully they are prepared for what that fully means:D I agree 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 Yes, it is in the Constitution.Article 1, Section 2: "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct." No, Mrs. Mungo said that Congress can ask whatever they want in the census and that it says so in the consitution. I'm asking where is that in the constitution. I'm well aware that we need a head count as well as amendment 4 about the protection of our privacy. Where does the constitution say that congress can breech that privacy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 (edited) yeah, i grew tired reading alll those histories of violence too. But i'd be an idiot to think we're headed to a peaceful utopia. There's a lot of modern worlds people want to create that i don't want to live in either. ;) eta: dh says "impending violence?" what about current violence? Current violence where? I think there is a big difference between violence with a foreign country and violence among neighbors. Edited April 25, 2011 by Sis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 No, Mrs. Mungo said that Congress can ask whatever they want in the census and that it says so in the consitution. I'm asking where is that in the constitution. I'm well aware that we need a head count as well as amendment 4 about the protection of our privacy. Where does the constitution say that congress can breech that privacy? It's right there in such Manner as they shall by Law direct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 I'm not concerned about getting my "fair share" :001_smile: I'm concerned about my rights being protected. That is the purpose of govenrment. No, it is not the only purpose of government. yeah, i grew tired reading alll those histories of violence too. But i'd be an idiot to think we're headed to a peaceful utopia. There's a lot of modern worlds people want to create that i don't want to live in either. ;) eta: dh says "impending violence?" what about current violence? Current violence where? In the US? sure. get the thing passed, take control, and start tweaking 'intentions.' Ever read Animal Farm? Are you comparing the founding fathers to Marx? You don't really think it would just be about 'not being represented' do you?There's a LOT going on socially and fiscally that people are incredibly upset with. There's no way we'd be able to address them all in this thread, but I'm going to tread lightly and assume [dangerously?] that you are well aware of the seriousness of the manymanymany issues we have had for years. enjoy your dinner. Honestly, I don't think those of you on that particular bandwagon want to hear what I really think, *at all*. I cannot continue in this thread and tread lightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidi Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 It's right there "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct." So... define enumeration. Actually I think someone defined it in an earlier post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 This does bear repeating: It's right there in such Manner as they shall by Law direct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts