This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Monday, September 17, 2012

Today is CONSTITUTION DAY...Take time to reflect on what this means to us!


35 comments:

NewGuy said...

Today, the federal government has acquired an all but unquestioned dominance over virtually every area of American life. It acts without constitutional limits and increasingly regulates our most basic activities, from how much water is in our toilets to what kind of light bulbs we can buy.

So while we face many challenges, the most difficult task ahead—and the most important—is to restore constitutional limits on government. Forty visionaries signed a piece of paper 225 years ago today that became one of the most vital documents in the world: the U.S. Constitution.

By design, it limited the power of government under the rule of law, created a vigorous framework that expanded economic opportunity, protected national independence and secured liberty and justice for all. But how is that limitation of powers working today?

See article: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/09/17/morning-bell-our-constitution-is-under-fire/?roi=echo3-13135763525-9714951-b4b66224dcd677e28713c52cda4eb0a9&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

guy faulkes said...

The Constitution is the contract between the people and the government that gives the government the right to exist. The question is how much and the government violate the contract before it becomes void.

Wolf's Head said...

From the actions taken under both parties it appears to be void now.

guy faulkes said...

You have a point, Wolf.

Happily Married said...

New Guy - The gov tells us who we can and cannot marry, is trying to make us have an id to vote, and is trying to tell women what to do with their own bodies. You are right - we do need less government and more freedom.

Anonymous said...

I want to marry 10 women, vote 10 times and do drugs. Are you saying I should be able to?

Happily Married said...

I want to preserve the environment for my kids and grand kids and prevent those that don't care about the environment from ruining it for them - are you saying I cant do that?

The point is that both sides take issues.

I think if you want to marry 10 women - go for it and good luck. Voting is a one stop deal. and you are absolutely going to need to do drugs if you marry 10 women so yes - go for it.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:33 if you do those things and do not hurt anyone while doing them then who cares.

guy faulkes said...

I want to preserve the environment for my kids and grand kids and prevent those that don't care about the environment from ruining it for them - are you saying I cant do that? - HM

Not if what you want hurts others and the economy because there is no scientific proof behind your opinion.

The issue of man made global warming is an example(although I do not know how HM feels about it).

You have the right to your beliefs, but that does not negate mine. No one made you ruler of the universe, nor did they me. People vote to decide. Its called politics. The Constitution address how it works.

As you do not like the idea of showing an ID in order to vote( which you have to do to buy some medicine or attend the Democrat convention), HM, what is your opinion of thousands of dead people being on the voter roles? Do they get to vote early and often?

Happily Married said...

Guy -

Boy I hope so I am ready for the zombie apocolypse. These thousands - are they actually voting - or is it a case of someone has the opportunity for fraud? My research shows the latter. This voter ID initiative is a solution trying to find a problem: A recent study by the News21 group found a mere 10 cases of voter impersonation since 2000 among 146 million registered voters in the United States: one out of every 15 million prospective voters. The student researchers found more fraud among absentee ballots and voter registration — fraud photo IDs would do nothing to prevent. Yet, 37 state legislatures have enacted stricter voter photo identification laws ... on the premise of preventing election fraud.

The voter fraud BS is just a way to disenfranchise mostly poor and mostly minority voters - plain and simple. Please show me data - actual data that shows voter fraud is a problem worth solving. Yes, I agree it happens - but if the above statement is indicative, it is not enough to require ID. I have done my homework and got an A on my assignment - how about you? Or maybe you will just keep your head in the sand like you do about man made global warming: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/18/2012-hottest-year-on-record-federal-agency-says/?hpt=hp_t2

guy faulkes said...

Please show me data about how an ID would disenfranchise anyone. Also show me data about how much voter fraud was committed that was not caught. How many cases does it take to be to many?

You have provided data that it happens yourself. It is the exact same thing as when the guy asked a girl if she would sleep with him for a million dollars and she said she would, but got mad when asked if she would sleep with him for ten dollars. She asked just what did he think she was. He told her they both knew what she was and that they were discussing price. You are saying it is all right to break the law as long as it does not happen more than you want it to.

Thank you for proving the point and saving me the effort.

I wonder how long it will take to pass this into law once Bev is gone.

Anonymous said...

Voting is a right. All other activities that you cite that need ID, are privileges.

Sarkazein said...

Anonymous- So you are not for having to show an ID to buy a gun? No licensing through the FCC for broadcasting?

guy faulkes said...

The right to vote is mentioned about five times in the Constitution, always as a method to limit discrimination. A voter ID law does not discriminate against anyone. It keeps people from being discriminated against by having had their identity stolen add by having the value of their vote protected from diminishing due to voter fraud. Everyone is treated the same.

Any guesses on how long it is until this legislation is passed and signed in North Carolina?

Anonymous said...

The Constitution requires ID?

guy faulkes said...

No, but voting requirements are in the main a states rights issue and many states do require ID. After all it does not discriminate against anyone, so the federal government has no reason to get involved.

This does not mean the liberal feds are not trying purely for political reasons (maybe being helped by voters fraud?).

Happily Married said...

Guy -

Unlike you who still just follow along with Fox news BS, I have done research and here is my data:http://www.brennancenter.org/content/section/category/voting_rights_elections/

The actual number of voter fraud = proven or not is not significant enough to warrant voter ID requirements. The data above clearly shows it disenfranchises people. It discriminates in that it affects only certain classes and races.

NewGuy said...

HP..You cite the Brennan Center as your unbiased source? The same Brennan Center founded by supporters of one of the most liberal supreme court justices of the modern era? The same Brennan Center headed up by Bill Clinton's speechwriter?

Happily Married said...

New Guy -

Turns out you were right - Brennan center is not in line with other research and most likely biased. So maybe voters are not disenfranchised by voter id laws. Can anyone provide evidence of any significant amount of voter fraud that will be stopped by voter id laws? I ask for clarification and I am halfway to changing my tune about voter id laws. Why am i the only one that actually considers different opinions? When they are backed up with fact, like in this case, I reevaluate my thinking. The reason I ask for opposing data is so i can make educated evaluations - not to be a smart ass - and no - an opinion is not data. When somebody here provides me with data about Romney's budget plan, I will listen.

NewGuy said...

HM..This is (I think) the second time that you have at least reconsidered a position you have taken.

I really like that in a person!

As far as voter ID - I think the question to me is "how much fraud is acceptable?". If you remember in Doctor Lee, in the OJ Simpson trial, was being cross examined about the "amount" of contamination in a DNA sample. He said that the amount wasn't the issue....that when you see cockroaches in your spaghetti, you don't have to count them to know there is a problem.

Voter fraud is hard to detect and isn't really investigated in many cases where the election wasn't close. That doesn't mean it isn't there...or that it isn't prevalent.

I don't truthfully know how many legally eligible voters today don't have ID's. But, I think there is a pretty simple solution...just put a photo and whatever other Identifying information is needed on the voter registration cards.

Anonymous said...

Constitution day was also the anniversary of the worst example of politics in our countries history. 23000 died, were injured, were captured, or went missing in that day 150 years ago.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/17/150-years-since-americas-bloodiest-day/

guy faulkes said...

Hm, you are not the only person that changes his mind on this blog. You just have to convince us it would be the proper thing to do.

For example, I used to be a Republican until I was convinced being one had nothing to do with being conservative. This blog had a major impact on this decision.

You might owe the Fox network an apology for the BS comment, as it seems your research may have been faulty (as it was with Romney's budget plan).

Happily Married said...

My research on voter id was faulty as the people here had more information than I did (or time I was willing to spend to find it). Once again, i ask the question about budget plans, can anyone show me where the Romney budget plan will actually create jobs and reduce the deficit?

And I don't owe Fox news crap - they have been consistently proven wrong - even a blind squirrel gets a nut every so often. Regarding the budget plans this is what I found (about Ryan):
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/14/fact-check-ryan-budget-plan-doesnt-actually-slash-budget/
and this gem of hypocrisy:
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1791517182001/myth-vs-fact-breaking-down-the-romney-ryan-budget/
A dumb blonde tries to explain a white guy's terribly mislabeled basic issues and "proves" (in a bs opinion piece)that giving money to the rich is better. I will say again - the dow is up 5000 points - who owns sticks - the rich - where are the jobs. Companies are hoarding billions right now - where is the hiring. Giving money back to the rich will not solve our problems and is shameful - plain and simple.

Please give me data - fox news cant seem to.

Happily Married said...

and then there is this from fox news:

http://www.fox19.com/story/17096680/reality-check-fact-checking-mitt-romneys-budget-plan

So is it OK to give more money to the rich and not reduce the deficit?

I think it is not.

Happily Married said...

BTW -

Please excuse th ecomment about dumb blonde - her resume would indicate otherwise - her opinions do not.

Reader said...

We're not wealthy, but we aren't spending our money...until Obama is out of office. HM, I disagree with all the conservatives who post here on immigration. My heart just won't let me turn anyone away.

guy faulkes said...

Reader, I can understand your compassion, but I feel that the harm illegal aliens do to the country more than justifies supporting the rule of law.

Sarkazein said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sarkazein said...

Happy wrote- "So is it OK to give more money to the rich..."

So warped.

Anonymous said...

Wow what do you know sarkazien has censorship abilities now.

Sarkazein said...

Anonymous 12:12- I deleted my own comment as it was an accidental double click. On the comment page, there is a trash can symbol next to the time of comment, at least on my page. Some have them and some don't, I guess.

guy faulkes said...

Opoib is back as Anonymous! It did not take long, did it?

guy faulkes said...

HM, no one is giving money to the rich. It was theirs in the first place. Less of it was stolen.

Sarkazein said...

I can delete only my own comments with the trash can symbol. If you are an "Anonymous" or Annoyance in this case, it may not appear on your posted comments.

NewGuy said...

Guy, he never actually left. I have been deleting his "troll" postings as anonymous on a continuing basis. I just missed that one but I've corrected it now.

Funny though, the more he posts, the higher our traffic count goes. And advertising our blog on Craigslist ought to be good for attracting new readers. We should have thought of that. Maybe we can get our Technorati ratings up into the top 1% !!!