Oh No, I Don't Think So!!
Published on November 5, 2007 at 2:30 PM
|
Earlier this summer, I found out that our government is trying to get a law passed that girls 18 and older have to register for the draft. WHAT?!?!
I couldn't find anything on this topic. Maybe I wasn't using the right search words, but I did find the Democratic debate segment on it. Check this out!! It is pathetic.
I am just a little torqued... That is totally scary!! I just turned 18 and there is no way I am going into the army, navy, marines or anything else. That is wrong that they can mandate that I have to serve in the armed forces. That goes against my rights.
And since about June, I have been getting things from the army, navy, marines and everything else wanting me to join them. We couldn't figure out why. At first we thought it was because I took Dr. Farris's class on Constitutional Law, but then realized that I would be 18 and could register.
Well... umm... I don't think so. I pray this does not go into effect EVER!! It is wrong.
Why can they mandate that women have to go into the armed services?? Its like mandating that you have to get vaccinated. Uh... I am thinking... no. I don't want them making me get a virus put in me for some illness, that I might never even get. So why should I have to be made to go to war??
But I guess if they draft me, and I am praying fervently that they don't, then I want a pretty flowery hat like this and a uniform like this one too:
LOL!! Ok... that was pretty funny huh?? Mom was holding Lucy one day a couple weeks ago, and I was doing laundry and found the hat and put it on her, and I thought she looked like she was in the armed forces. lol. Such a doll, don't you think??
I needed some cheering up after researching all the above in this post. We need to keep our government in prayer ALL THE TIME!! If you want to read more about the fast downhill ride that our government is taking us on head over to Home Where They Belong. But be warned, I would not suggest anyone younger than 15 or 16 go there. There is alot of issues that are not for children.
As Always,
Thanks for stopping by “Daily” at the “Planet”!!
©AmandaDixon2007
|
|
(20) The Daily Planet Subscriber's Feedback
Leave Your Feedback
Article Page
Lookie here...20 have left their Feedback!!
Leave Your Feedback too
The Daily Planet Subscribers Feedback
November 5, 2007 at 2:57 PM...Sis...
 Commented by rjdjohn316
|
thank you! You are sooo sweet.
Well, I hope I can make it through the next 14 years...
Thank you. You are becoming quite the lady as well.
Well, I LOVE baking cookies, but right now, I love sleep much better! LOL
Thank you. With your help, I'll have the best birthday ever!
I'm not hard to please...
Love,
Rachel
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 3:36 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by quietcajun
|
Lucy is so adorable!
I hope that it is NOT that case about selective service enrollment for women b/c Kait will be 18 in only 3 years!
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 4:57 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by Jo
|
Thanks!
I think I forgot to say Happy Birthday last time... idk how I forgot when that was the whole reason I came to your blog LOL Yep I'm forgetfull!
That's terrible that they want to do that. I personally do not want to join the army. I'm just not that type of person.
:::Jo:::
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 5:10 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by -Auntie
|
Yikes is RIGHT. My word that is scary.
Oh those pics of Luc are adorable!!!!
Love you!
-A
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 5:13 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by totustuus
|
It's ironic that you posted this because we were just talking about it in our PSR (Sunday School) classes yesterday. That would be AWFUL if they required women to turn in a draft form!!! Men are supposed to protect the country in war, not women.
Lucy does look like she's in the navy. lol!!!
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 5:32 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by SeaChel
|
Wow! I hope that that won't go into effect too! I'm not against women serving in the army/navy/etc. but I don't want to and I definately DON'T want to be forced to!!!
Aww, she's too cute!!!! :-D
~Sea
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 6:03 PM...Hey
 Commented by cherryblossom
|
Oh I get stuff alllllllll the time from the Marines especially. I am now saving all the flyers and stuff for like scrap book stuff hahaha! Yeah well my step dad is retired Air Force and my dad is currently doing 12 years in the Navy. He has been over seas but hasn't told me where lol.. top secret.. :P
Don't worry. They can't make you do anything. Unless we went into another world war then they would make you but we won't. That's the only thing the UN is good for. Keeping us out of the next world war.. lol. Yeah I make no sense. heheh.
Like I said, don't worry about it. :)
Love
Julia
PS- she is toooooooooooo cute! :D
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 6:22 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by A10B8CM6
|
I don't think you will have to worry,they can't do that. If they made moms and dads draft into the army, who'd take care of the children???? The state take them? Don't think so, foster parents available before would be at war. So...orphanges???? It won't be able to work. I have gotten lots of army things, still, though I am in college right now and NEVER want to be into the army or any of the like. I don't think that's a woman's job. I am 18, almost 19, yikes if they did, I'm of eligible age. In the same sense though, if women can you know, "do" everything else, why can't they be drafted like men. In a feminists sense, wonder if they would like that "equal" mentality??? bet not, haha. Oh, and in America, they have to respect your religious beliefs, so we could get out of going to war most likely. Drafted male Quakers aren't made to fight, because they don't believe in that sort of thing.
Anyway, Lucy is cute, I love babies, so precious. You and I both will wear that if drafted. Added our long skirts and dresses. Iraqis don't believe in women fighting in wars and such. Bet they'll hate us even more for drafting women to war. JUst a thought. Sorry to rant, but we discussed that a little in government class last year. I got frustrated. A boy mentioned the feminist "equal", why aren't they drafted? The other girls in the class cringed at that thought, I was the only one though who believed like you do.
Well, God Bless. It's storming again, so I am getting off the comp now. Have a good night.
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 6:34 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by Vicki |
Hey Hon, not in the mood for a real comment, so I'll just say that "I was here"...
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 10:21 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by mandygrace
|
I still love ya as a sister in Christ even though you don't agree with me about comments! Just wanted to clear that up. Lol.
I remember around the time I turned 18 someone from army recruiting kept leaving messages for me to call them back. In one message he even said that there are many ways that even women can serve their country in the army. No thank you! I'd rather serve my country by being a stay at home daughter. :-) They haven't called in awhile, so I guess they got the picture.
~Mandy
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 5, 2007 at 11:39 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by Anonymous |
Ok, I don't have much to say on this subject, but two works sum up my feelings. YOU STUPIDS! Anyway, they need to get a life.
RYC: I will be posting a post devoted to your birthday, just depends on when I get to it. I've got so much to write! Arrggg!
Eric
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 6, 2007 at 8:12 AM...Hey,
 Commented by dixiefiddler
|
I loved reading the birthday post!!! The pictures were awesome! ^_^ It sounded like you had a truly blessed day.
Woah! So that law is not in effect right now? That is a good thing. I am totally proud to be American and everything, but God did not say in his word that women were to go to war. In the battles in the Bible it was the MEN who fought. God intended for the women to stay at home and keep the house, and care for the children. Which is where I'd rather be anyway. When I tell people that they just raise their eyebrows and say, "So you wouldn't defend your country?" I think if it was the law I would do it because the Bible says to obey the laws of the land. But that wouldn't give me my dream of being the wife and mother that I want to be. One realy should go off to war if they want 15 children. 0_0 I'll 18 in July, and Jordan is 19 and she has had some stuff from the Army and Navy.
Well, I'll stop rambling about about stuff I hardly know anything about. ^_^
RYC: Awww! To bad. But I shouldn't be suprised that you had gotten it already. But, now you have it again, (the award). To bad you can't bring it back to the store and get want you really want, eh? lol
Have a blessed day,
Sarah
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 6, 2007 at 1:20 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by Ebell1993
|
Amnda,
That is so horrible about drafting girls 18 or older. I will definitely keep this state in my prayers! We really need to be reminded to keep our country in our prayers especially as the presidential elections come up.
Lucy looks so fuuny. LOL! I love seeing pictures of her!
Love, Miss Elizabeth
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 6, 2007 at 6:17 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by Ebell1993 |
Hi again Amanda-
Could you do me a favor? I have a friend on HSB who url is http://www.homeschoolblogger.com/dpfhpres. He has 4 friends but I am the ONLY one who comments on his blog. So I was wondering if you could stop by his blog and leave a nice long comment. He would really appreciate it. He has a wonderful blog and is very nice. Thanks!
Have a great day and God bless!
Love, Miss Elizabeth
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 7, 2007 at 9:29 AM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by Chris
|
How is it going against your right to register you for the draft at 18...and not against my rights to resister me at 18? Do you think each sex has their own set of constitutional rights? Or do you think that registering for a draft is against all people's rights?
I don't wanna start a fight, just want to understand your position.
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 8, 2007 at 9:23 AM...Yikes!
 Commented by melarooski
|
Creepy! I wonder why you've gotten all of that in the mail though. My sister Josie is turning 18 next month and I can't remember her getting anything. Still, that's just, scary. I asked my Dad if he had heard or seen anything about women being drafted and he hadn't. He did say that that topic would come up at his coffee shop sometimes and he would hold the argument that if women want equal rights, not only should they be allowed to join the armed forces, they should be open for drafting as well. Now, of course, my Dad would hate the day that ever happened. He hates it that women are in the armed forces at all! But if women really and truly want equal rights with men, they should be drafted! And all his liberal minded customers just didn't get it. I say all liberals have mental issues, even my grandparents. *sigh*
I do love the pics of Lucy. She is so cute and that's too funny that the hat looked like that of a soldier. ;-D Thanks for sharing with us!
-Mellie
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 9, 2007 at 8:27 AM...Untitled Comment
November 9, 2007 at 6:51 PM... :)
 Commented by 15Proverbs1
|
Hello Amanda,
Just wanted to say hi. And tell you the pictures of Lucy Lily made me smile. :)
Your sister in Christ, Bethany
"A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger." Proverbs 15:1
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 9, 2007 at 7:22 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by TheLordsDaughter
|
I just got a chance to see the award you gave me and what you said about me... Thank you very much... you are so sweet!
Tell Jocelyn and Rachel I said hello. HSB is so slow today that I will not be able to visit them.
Love,
Rebekah
P.S. Please tell Rachel that I e-mailed her... :)
P.S.S. Do you want a copy of the poem I wrote you? I can email you one if you do. (If you do not that is fine.)
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
November 9, 2007 at 9:00 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by IloveyouGod |
Hey Amanda,
Very well said!! I've got lots of things about joining the army as well, and I didn't know why. So thanks for posting this. It is crazy, and I think you said it very well.
~~Brooke
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
|
Are We Following The Original Intent of the Founding Fathers??
Published on October 1, 2007 at 5:33 PM
|
One thing I love in school is government and law. I just love learning about what our government does and what the laws are and such. I have actually not taken too much on the subject, but it still is very interesting to me. One of my assignments this past month was to take a closer look at original intent. So here is my "essay" on the meaning of it and if we are still practicing the founding father's original intent.
Are We Following The Original Intent of the Founding Fathers??
One thing I have a big issue with is original intent. My issue is with the government that think they have to change the original intent of the founding fathers.
When our government was first created it was based on Christian principles. And though we still use most of them, we have strayed from the original meaning of them.
We now make laws and things based on our own agendas.
When the founders of our country started this country, they took alot of time figuring out what would make our country run smoothly, so we would have unity.
I have read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and I have seen how much we have strayed from original intent.
I believe the constitution clearly states what the original intention was when they made up this country. It was:
"WE the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to oursleves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Now from reading that, see how far we are from their original intent?? I got out my Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary to get an idea of what they meant and what the meaning of the words back then meant.
Perfect Union:
"Perfect":
Finished; complete; consummate; not defective; having all that is
requisite to its nature and kind.
"Union":
The act of joining two or more things into one, and thys forming a
compound body or mixure; or the junction or coalition of things thus
united.
From those descriptions, I would have to say we do not have a perfect union. We are not a finished or completed people or country. We don't have any unity. We fight against each other in politics because we don't have that same party. In the beginning, there was not the division of the parties as there is now. I mean, there was the parties, but they were not so totally against each other as nowadays. They meant something different back then when our country was just starting.
They were still united together. We are called the UNITED states, not the divided states. Unless we look at the meaning of those words and take action into making them work, we will not have a perfect union.
Establish Justice:
"Establish":
To set and fix firmly or unalterably; to settle permantly.
"Justice":
The virtue which consists in giving to everyone what is his due;
practical conformity to the laws and to principles of rectitude in the
dealings of men with each other; honesty; integrity in commmerce or
mutual intercourse.
We do not have justice established. Justice is not set permantly in our country. We change justice to fit what we want. We do not give justice to those who deserve it, yet we give it to those who don't. This goes back to being unified. If we are not unified, then we will not be able to hand out justice.
Domestic Tranquility:
"Domestic":
Belonging to the house, or home; pertaining to one's place of residence,
and to the family.
"Tranquility":
Quiet; calm; undisturbed; peaceful; not agitated
I think this is something we have upheld. I have peace about my residence, home, and family. They have kept that one from the original intent. Back when they wrote this, they had just come out of tyranny, that would come into their homes and take things. So I believe we have kept that one.
Provide for the Common Defense:
"Provide":
To procure beforehand; to get, collect or make ready for the future use;
to prepare.
"Common"
Belonging equally to more than one or to many indefinitely.
"Defense":
Anything that opposes attack, violence, danger or injury; anything that
secures the person, the rights or possessions of men; fortification;
guard; protection; security.
Now, I don't know alot about our armed services, but I think that we are doing a good job providing for our common defense. We are being defended everyday as our brave soldiers fight in other countries. Our government provides for our safety and defense from terrorists. Although I don't think it would be fair to the service people to just up and pull them out of combat in Iraq. Sure I bet they want to come home, but its like this: If they just come home and don't finish what they started, there won't be a home. It will just keep being attacked by terrorists. We have to put an end to the terrorism. Once you get in a fight, you don't leave. You stay
til its finished.
Promote General Welfare:
"Promote":
To forward; to advance; to contribute to the growth, enlargement or
excellence of anything valuable.
"General":
The whole; the total; that which comprehends all or the chief part.
"Welfare":
Exemption from misfortune, sickness, calamity or evil; the enjoyment of
health and the common blessings of life; prosperity; happiness.
I really am not sure on this one. I would say the government does promote general welfare being as it is prosperity. I don't think anyone can be exempt from sickness or misfortune or calamity or evil, but this being the United State of America, we do have prosperity and happiness in knowing that we are being protected from evil that would attack our nation.
Secure the Blessings of Liberty:
"Secure":
To guard effectually from danger; to make safe.
"Blessing":
Benediction; a wish of happiness pronounced; a prayer imporing happiness
upon another.
"Liberty":
Freedom from restraint, in a general sense, and the application to the
body, or to the will and mind.
Our forefathers have secured for us the blessing of being free from tyranny. That is something that has not change, and if it ever did, we would not be the United States. Not only have our forefathers made sure we are still free, but I do believe that we are securing the blessing of liberty in the United States. We have the liberty to do what we wish. That includes the liberty to be a free people. I believe we are fighting now for this freedom of liberty for our future. And we must keep fighting it. Freedom is not free.
Now that I have taken the Preamble apart piece by piece, I think that we can see that we have strayed from the original intent of the founders, just by looking at it and what it says. So I can't imagine what we would find if we looked at the whole Constitution. I think the founding fathers would turn in their graves if they knew how far we had gotten from the original intent.
They founded this country on the original intent, why do we have to
change it?? It hasn't helped us any.
As Always,
Thanks for stopping by "Daily" at the "Planet"!!
©AmandaDixon2007
|
|
(14) The Daily Planet Subscriber's Feedback
Leave Your Feedback
Article Page
Lookie here...14 have left their Feedback!!
Leave Your Feedback too
The Daily Planet Subscribers Feedback
October 1, 2007 at 5:51 PM...Hiya
Commented by IloveyouGod |
Hey Amanda!
For once I'm first to comment! WHOO! Lol
I read your essay, and I think you did a very good job on it. I really like it how you basically "broke down" the Preamble. I have to agree with you as well: we have strayed from our fore- father's original intent, and it's pretty sad.
Keep up the great writing!
-Brooke
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 1, 2007 at 8:39 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by giftedgirl
|
Hey!
Aw, thanks. :-) You make me blush.
Don't have time to read your post right now, but I"ll read it later. :-)
Hugs,
Becca
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 1, 2007 at 10:39 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by kittyqueen
|
WOW, I know how much our government has strayed from the constitution, I studied government in 8th grade so i know alot about it.
THank you bunches for the comment!
Luv,
Miss Kitty
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 1, 2007 at 11:48 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by BlogBoy
|
I think that the Bill of Rights should read more like this:
"We the government and ruling powers have decided that because our main goal is the making of money we can fix/amend the laws the way we want.
We will say what you want to hear as long as we get the votes and the cash."
*going back to finish reading the rest of the article*
RYC: Mom is doing much better, thanks for the prayer!
I don't think we are coming down for the bash. As of now there is no car, and no one we know from around is going, so we can't get a ride. Only thing to do it pray!
Eric
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 2, 2007 at 7:09 AM...Hey,
Commented by dixiefiddler |
I'm not real smart in the government department. But I love what you wrote. It made me understand it better.
Thanks for the "info" on your sibs. lol. I knew that Jocelyn was your sister. I got that from Becky, giftedgirl,
Have a blessed day.
Sarah
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 2, 2007 at 7:12 AM...Hey,
Commented by dixiefiddler |
Me again. I was wondering if you could help me get a blogstatter like you have on your sidebar? I tried and I just can't figure it out. But if you don't have time that fine too. Have a blessed day.
Sarah
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 2, 2007 at 1:44 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by totustuus |
Great insights!!! I love studying government and the Constitution as well. I'm also following along more closely with current political events and the elections this year. It's all so interesting and important to be involved in.
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 2, 2007 at 3:31 PM...Mono
October 2, 2007 at 3:45 PM...Untitled Comment
October 2, 2007 at 4:06 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by A10B8CM6 |
I liked that post. I am glad you have domestic tranquility but unfortunately, for most families, this is not upheld. Many young people in this country have terrible home lives with about 50% of homes ending in divorce, young children ( especially boys ) being raised by single mothers and no male image.
I think if the founding fathers saw what was going on in the United States they created, WOW, they'd go crazy! Imagine those Puritian Pilgrims seeing America now.
History is interesting, but I learned little about that in school, only what the teacher wanted us to know. And of course, most public school teachers values differ greatly from mine.
Well, God Bless
~ NMJ ~
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 3, 2007 at 8:11 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by norwezter
|
Do you pay attention to politics much? I've just started trying to figure out who is who and who does what. : )
Buttercup
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 7, 2007 at 1:29 PM...Great....
 Commented by Mariel
|
....essay! I like politics too! You are a very good writer--but haven't I told you that? :+)
Love you!
Mariel
P.S. That icon Jed made for you was really nice of him. It's great to have friends like that who will cheer you up isn't it?
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 8, 2007 at 4:07 AM...Go Superangel
Commented by Anonymous |
I am encouraged to see you thinking about these things now! You are the future of our country. Continue to investigate Freedom!
:-)
ThirstyJon
www.freedomthirst.com
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
October 8, 2007 at 6:31 PM...Dear Superangel
Commented by funniebone |
I want to know how you think the Bible and Superman/Smallville relate to one another, please take no offense by my asking. I am just wondering.
Rachael
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
|
The Government Beat Me To It!!
Published on April 12, 2007 at 4:52 PM
|
In the year 2006, the Lord came unto Noah, who was now living in the United States, and said, "Once again, the earth has become wicked and over-populated, and I see the end of all flesh before me. Build another Ark and save 2 of every living thing along with a few Good humans."
He gave Noah the blueprints, saying, "You have 6 months to build the Ark before I will start the unending rain for 40 days and 40 nights."
Six months later, the Lord looked down and saw Noah weeping in his yard, but no Ark.
"Noah!" He roared, "I'm about to start the rain! Where is the Ark ?"
"Forgive me, Lord," begged Noah, "but t hings have changed. I needed a building permit. I've been arguing with the inspector about the need for a sprinkler system. My neighbors claim that I've violated the Neighborhood zoning laws by building the Ark in my yard and exceeding the height limitations. We had to go to the Development Appeal Board for a decision. Then the Department of Transportation demanded a bond be posted for the future costs of moving power lines and other overhead obstructions, to clear the passage for the Ark's move to the sea. I told them that the sea would be coming to us, but they would hear nothing of it. Getting the wood was another problem. There's a ban on cutting local trees in order to save the spotted owl. I tried to convince the environmentalists that I needed the wood to save the owls - but no go!
When I started gathering the animals, an animal rights group sued me. They insisted that I was confining wild animals against their will. They argued the accommodation was going to be too restrictive, and it was Cruel and inhumane to put so many animals in a confined space. Then the EPA ruled that I couldn't build the Ark until they'd conducted an environmental impact study on your proposed flood. I'm still trying to resolve a complaint with the Human Rights Commission on how many minorities I'm supposed to hire for my building crew. Immigration and Naturalization is checking the green-card status of most of the people who want to work. The trades unions say I can't use my sons. They insist I have to hire only Union workers with Ark-building experience. To make matters worse, the IRS seized all my assets, claiming I'm trying to leave the country illegally with endangered species. So, forgive me, Lord, but it would take at least 10 years for me to finish this Ark. "
Suddenly the skies cleared, the sun began to shine, & a rainbow stretched across the sky. Noah looked up in wonder and asked, "You mean you're not going to destroy the world?"
"No," said the Lord. "The government beat me to it."
This was on a goat ring that we are a part of. I thought it was really true and goes with the ConLaw class I am taking. Speaking of which, I had to write a midterm essay for my class, so would you all like to read it??
Ok... here it is... All facts are hypothetical in the question we are discussing. They never happened. Dr. Farris came up with them himself. I do believe though they are based on another law that was similar and had the same attributes as the following. Please understand... this law was never made!! It is fictional.
We were asked to discuss the constitutionality of the Act and the President’s executive order using cases and things we have previously learned in the class.
We have been called to determine whether the “Truth in Campaigning Law” and President Clinton’s executive order on that Act were constitutional or not.
We have gone over former cases that apply to this situation and have found out the truth in the matter.
Here is the matter on which we will be giving a decision about:
“On April 14, 1997, Congress passed the "Truth in Campaigning" Act. Surprisingly, it allows voters to sue political candidates in federal courts if they have "reason to believe” that a candidate is lying about a campaign promise.
Unsurprisingly, Congress made the bill apply only to candidates for state and local offices and exempted all those running for federal office. Congress made specific findings that candidates for state offices made laws which “directly and materially” affect interstate commerce.
President Clinton held a press conference in which he issued a Presidential executive order which imposed identical requirements on candidates for Congress and the Senate--but, of course, not the president.”
Below we will discuss the matters previously stated and determine whether they are constitutional or not.
On the matter of Congress issuing the “Truth in Campaigning Law”:
Congress justified this Act on the foundation that there were “specific findings that candidates for state offices made laws which “directly and materially” affect interstate commerce.”
As we went over cases and such on the Commerce Clause, we found the following statement in “Joseph Story’s Exposition of the Commerce Clause”. It states as follows: “But when a State proceeds to regulate commerce with foreign nations, or among the several States, it is exercising the very power, which is granted to Congress...”
We have found this to mean that the States themselves are not allowed by the Constitution to have power to regulate interstate commerce.
But by the “specific findings” of Congress, we thereby assume that Congress found evidence that state offices that were unconstitutionally making laws that were involved with interstate commerce.
Though this does not in essence have interference with this case, we must state that the states making laws that affect interstate commerce is therefore illegal by the interpretation of the Constitution. Being that only Congress may make laws that regulate interstate commerce.
As the Court decided in “United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995)”, that the “Guns in School Act” was unconstitutional because Congress did not have sufficient evidence that guns in school substantially affected interstate commerce.
We also do not have substantial evidence that the candidates for state and local offices make laws that “directly and materially” affect interstate commerce.
We have come to question of why Congress did not apply this Act to federal offices. The conclusion is that if Congress had found evidence of state offices making laws that affect interstate commerce, they would not have only applied this Act to state offices.
Being as Congress is the body which is allowed the authority to make laws that regulate interstate commerce, they should have applied the “Truth in Campaigning Act” to federal offices also. And by proxy to the President.
Therefore we are in the opinion that the “Truth in Campaigning Act” was indeed unconstitutional.
On the matter of President Clinton issuing an executive order:
We have found that as stated in “Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952)”, “the court found that the President’s order amounts to lawmaking, a legislative function which the Constitution has expressly confided to the Congress and not the President.”
The President is only allowed to make laws pertaining to the army, navy, and militia or the national security of the United States, stated as follows in Article II-Section II-Clause 1 of the Constitution: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States…”
Or as found in “U.S. v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, 299 U.S. 304 (1936)”, that the President may issue an order if he has approval by Congress.
In that such case, President Roosevelt, did have Congress’ authority to authorize the ban and then lift the ban. Not only did he have their approval, but it directly applied to the national security of the United States.
There are no facts stating whether Congress approved this executive order for President Clinton. Neither can we find any reasoning for this order.
As the Court also found in Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer, Section II, that “The President’s power, if any, to issue the order must stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself.” Though this order did stem from an act of Congress, the President went against it, and remade this specific law, thereby going against Congress in lawmaking.
The Court also came to the conclusion in their final statements in Youngstown, that “The Founders of this Nation entrusted the lawmaking power to the Congress alone in both good and bad times.”
Therefore it is found that President Clinton’s executive order which imposed the “Truth in Campaigning Law” on Congress and the Senate is unconstitutional.
We, the Court, have found that both issues which we have discussed are unconstitutional according to the interpretation of the Constitution.
Love
Thanks for stopping by "Daily" at the "Planet"
©AmandaDixon2007
|
|
(6) The Daily Planet Subscriber's Feedback
Leave Your Feedback
Article Page
Lookie here...6 have left their Feedback!!
Leave Your Feedback too
The Daily Planet Subscribers Feedback
April 12, 2007 at 9:19 PM...Wow! That was really awesome!
Commented by Anonymous |
Hi Amanda,
I have never made a comment on your blog before, but I have read it many times. I am very, very impressed by your work in interpreting this law. Fantastic! I can't believe you're only 17 (I'm 33) and know so much about the law. You taught me something about Interstate Commerce today, and I appreciate it.
- April in RI
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 13, 2007 at 10:57 AM...Hey girl...
Commented by totustuus |
Hey, great job!!! Seems like you're learning a lot in this constitutional law class. I enjoyed the revised story of Noah's Ark, too. ;-) Lol
The essay was awesome!! Keep up the good work!
Love as always,
Sylvia
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 13, 2007 at 4:11 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by IloveyouGod |
Yes, I plan to blog much more now...Yay! :-)
Very interesting entry!!
Congrats. for being nominated for the blog awards!! You and your sis really deserve it :-)
Have a great day!! Brooke
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 13, 2007 at 5:26 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by TheLordsDaughter |
I have not read any thing else on your blog, so I can not comment on it yet, but I wanted to say CONGRATULATIONS!!! First and foremost on the acquisition of a new baby sister! I am SOOO evious! ;)
Also on being nominated for the blog awards. You absolutely match those tittles!
Love,
Rebekah ~ The Lord's Daughter
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 13, 2007 at 6:40 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by Canadagirl
|
I wanted to invite you to see what I looked like when I married my sweet Handsome almost 17 years ago. (0=
PS: I promise to come back and read your wonderful post and will comment again. (0= I just wanted to let you know you were thought of my SSiC
Love your big SSiC
In Him <><
-Mary
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 13, 2007 at 11:08 PM...Untitled Comment
|
Interpret It Right!!
Published on March 24, 2007 at 6:34 PM
Ok, here is a serious, theological post.
I am taking the HSLDA Constitutional Law for Enlightened Citizens by Dr. Michael Farris, and am really enjoying it.
It has shown me that I really don’t know much about our government as it is now. I know a lot about the beginning of our government and why they made the laws and rules they did, but I don’t know how far our government has gone away from the original intent of the Founders.
Some things I have learned are how our government is not following the Constitution. How much they have changed the meaning of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, ect. to make it fit so it looks like they are doing what they are supposed to. How the government has twisted what the Original Intent of the Founders and Signers were to fit their needs. How they have overstepped the boundaries of their place.
There is something I would like to share with you all. It is important information that everyone should be aware of. Here is how bad the government has gotten.
I have actually not gotten to this case yet, but we did cover some of it. I am sure there will be more.
Did you know that had the Supreme Court done their job in Roe v. Wade, there would be no abortion, no free choice about taking innocent babies lives. Had they actually interpreted the Declaration of Independence correctly they would have come to the opposite verdict than the one that was made.
If the Declaration of Independence had been properly used in Roe v. Wade, the Court would have affirmed the right to life of unborn children. In this infamous decision, the Supreme Court majority correctly noted the key phrase from the Fourteenth Amendment was, “No State…shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law….” The majority also correctly said that if an unborn child is a “person” within the meaning of our legal system, then the child has a right to life that would be superior to any claim of a woman to a right to abortion. But the Court said that there was no definitive rule to answer to the question concerning the “personhood” of unborn children.
The Declaration, however, answers the question: Is and unborn child a legally recognized “person”? The technical question is this: When does a human being become a “person” for the legal purpose of attaining the right to life?
The Declaration states, “[T]hat all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”
Now had the Supreme Court interpreted the Declaration the right way, with the Original Intent of the Founders, they would have realized that the unalienable right to life starts at the moment our Creator creates us. That is the only reasonable reading of the words of the Declaration.
But since we have strayed away from the Bible, and our Creator, they decided that a unborn baby is a "person" when it is born.
We, as humans, think that we have the right to make our own interpretations of things that already are written out for us. But they are Black and White. If we actually read it and realized that it is a certain way, we would not be as bad off as we are. If we just do what it says instead of fitting it to our own needs, we would understand that is was done that way for a reason. People don't just write things like the Constitution for fun. They took alot of time thinking it out, making sure it would work.
If we just read the Bible, listened to what God is trying to tell us, and did it, instead of reading the Bible, interpreting our own meaning, we would be A LOT better off!!
People write things because they already know what they mean when they write them. The Founders knew what the meaning of Life was, they understood when Life began because they followed and obeyed God. God knows what is best, and He already gave us the meaning for what is best. Yet, we think that we have to change the Original Intent of things that are set in stone.
We need to quit making our own meanings out of things and just read what they wrote. There is no reading between the lines in the Bible or the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence, or any document of the sort!!
They were written because they work. We need to quit changing them, because when we change them, they stop working the way they were supposed to.
Love
Thanks for stopping by "Daily" at the "Planet"
Give SuperHorseSteader your thoughts on Amanda's Horses post: How I Care For Estrella and Dulcy...
©AmandaDixon2007
|
|
(23) The Daily Planet Subscriber's Feedback
Leave Your Feedback
Article Page
Lookie here...23 have left their Feedback!!
Leave Your Feedback too
The Daily Planet Subscribers Feedback
March 24, 2007 at 6:56 PM...I loved this entry!!
Commented by sunnyflorida |
Where can I find that class/lecture for myself? I've immensely interested in the danger of losing our parental rights and the status of the 'children's rights' internationally and here at home.
Thanks!!
Mary
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 24, 2007 at 8:05 PM...Untitled Comment
March 24, 2007 at 11:22 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by PowerfulFor1SoSmall |
I really liked that, you got your point accross and made me think.
I am going to AU after college.
I can't imagen why you would need help writing an essay! LOL. You are a great writer! Bye.
~Marina~
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 25, 2007 at 12:48 PM...AMEN Sister !!!!
Commented by Canadagirl |
That was a AMAZING post my SSiC ! Your writing has improved amaingly and I learned so much from this. Wow God is going to use your class for many GREAT things , I can feel it in my spirit. Your worded this so passionately and stir up feelings to stand for our rights. I will have to refer to this when I deal with people who talk to me about their rights for a abortion. This shows what I have thought and felt all along. God Bless you SSiC for such a powerful piece of writing.
God Bless
In Him<><
-Mary
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 25, 2007 at 1:47 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by TrickyNikki
|
Wow, I've never looked at it like that. Sounds like a good class that you're taking! I never even knew when people made up their minds that abortion was "okay". I'm glad you pointed that out. Thank you.
Yes, I'm proud of myself for making dinner without burning anything. I have been able to cook for a little while, but normally something burned in the end.
~Nikki
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 25, 2007 at 3:28 PM...Hi Amanda
Commented by totustuus |
Wow, I just read through your post below and that was so beautiful and touching!! You did a great job on that.
I just got back from a really great retreat that my youth group went to this weekend, so I hope I'll have some time to blog about it!!
TTYL...
~Sylvia
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 26, 2007 at 1:41 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by BlogBoy |
Life is considered way too cheap in the U.S. I think that we’re already on a one way track to you-know-were. We kill our baby’s before they are born, we legally kill our elders, and we kill handicap people as if they were inferior.
Guess what? I found out something really neat! I am part Irish!!! It’s so exiting! It’s only about three or four generations back too. Anyway I came to post a comment, so I did. Talk to you later!
Eric
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 26, 2007 at 6:45 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by mandygrace |
Great post! It sounds like you're learning a lot, and I hope the class is going better for you. I took a political science class a couple years ago and found it fascinating. You're right - they shouldn't be reading between the lines when it comes to interpreting the Constitution.
-Mandy
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 27, 2007 at 12:06 PM...Untitled Comment
March 27, 2007 at 12:40 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by Earthling
|
Neat post! I was thinking about taking that con law class. Do you do the online or the DVD course?
It's true, the Constituition is so not being followed in today's government. It's sad.
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 27, 2007 at 1:04 PM...Untitled Comment
 Commented by DarthYxpu
|
Cool!
You are so smart!
You should start a website!
You know way more about this kinda thing than the average teen.
Start a website about all this. You could have little tutorials with PowerPoint or something!
I donno, just an idea!
LOL.
I posted on both blogs!
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 27, 2007 at 7:35 PM...Constitutional Law - Declaration of Independence
Commented by Grandpa and Dorothy |
Very well thought through.
Love,
Grandpa and Dorothy
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 27, 2007 at 11:17 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by Anonymous |
I will gladly help you with anything having to do with horses!!!! :) Just let me know what you need.
Let just say that what Paulie knows about computers I know about HORSEZZZZZZZZ!
shaiya
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 28, 2007 at 11:39 PM...a note from Rose
 Commented by Rose
|
Hello Amanda,
That was a very good post. You definatly need to post more of your "theological posts". I absolutely agree with you. I could go on and on about how abortion is wrong and just politics in general. It annoys me to no end when teenagers say they don't care about politics. It effects everyone. So EVERYONE should care about it. But I don't need to convince you. LOL.
Sorry, that was pretty long.
I would really like to get your opinion on my post: Makeup? even if you don't agree.
I really do love to hear from you,
Rose
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 29, 2007 at 7:09 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by Anonymous |
I do hope then that you wear only dresses, for women are not to look like men, that you burn sacrifices and stone your neighbours when they don't. I do hope that you stone anyone who may not be acting on Lord.
Please be careful with your interpretation of the laws. Nowwhere does it say "life begins at conception" in the constitution, so unless you are the founding fathers, you do not know the original intent of their statements.
~Scarecrow
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
March 30, 2007 at 1:00 PM...Untitled Comment
March 30, 2007 at 11:00 PM...Great thoughts!
March 31, 2007 at 12:42 AM...Hi
 Commented by GalacticBlogger
|
I just wanted to stop by to say, mara aure. LOL.
I posted an entry this afternoon. Leave a comment! Tell Rachel and Joci that I said hi!
Namarie,
Luke
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 2, 2007 at 9:15 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by TheLordsDaughter |
I loved your story! You don't give yourself enough credit!
You should read some of my stories! My family says that they are good, but they don't seem that good to me!
I am not graduating until I am 18 either! I will be 17 this year. I can hardly believe it!
Love Your Sister in Christ,
Rebekah ~ The Lord's Daughter
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 2, 2007 at 10:52 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by DarthYxpu |
WOW! I just noticed you signed up on my site!
That is so cool! You’re my first … umm… customer!!!
(Kinda)
LOL!
Thanks.
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 3, 2007 at 7:28 PM...Untitled Comment
Commented by giftedgirl |
Amanda ~
You, my friend, are good at writing these kinds of posts. I mean it. That was well written, to the point and it made me get even more "on fire" about abortion.
What I don't understand is why pro-choice people use "overpopulation" as an excuse for abortion. I said as much on my blog. It was mentioned to me that pro-choice supporters don't say the whole world is overpopulated, just parts of it. "Like Africa." I'm sorry, but how does killing our children help Africa?
Hugs,
Becca
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 4, 2007 at 1:54 AM...Great Job, Amanda
 Commented by JacqueDixonSoulRestES
|
With all of the new responsibilities you have gained in the past few months, you are doing such a great job with all of it.
This is very well-written and thought out.
In order to know what the Founding Fathers intended, you have to do a lot more than look at today's interpretation of the Constitution and laws or opinions. You have done a great job of applying truth, history and common sense!!
Love you, Mom
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
April 20, 2007 at 11:06 PM...Keep your mind open.
Commented by jverity |
First and formost, I applaud you for taking the initiative to learn more about our Constitution - very few people do, unfortunately. Second, speaking as a lawyer (who has also had a class or two on Con Law), my opinion is that yours is an extremely narrow and skewed reading of "original intent" in the constitution. You must also ask yourself: where did the Founders tell us that "original intent" is what matters in constitutional interpretation over many generations? "Original intent" is a method of constitutional interpretation that came into fashion much, much later and is not (in my opinion) supported by the writings of the founding fathers. When interpreting the constitution, you must be careful not to start with the goal in mind and work backwards into your reasoning. That aside, I commend you for the study of our Constitution - keep up the good work!
|
|
Article Feedback Link
|
|
|
Commented by 
Commented by 
Commented by 
Commented by 
Commented by 
Commented by 
Commented by 
Commented by 
