Excellent analogy. Spot on. When a government decides to convert privileges into "Rights", that government will and must become repressive. Our founders tried to protect the "people" from this situation and thus the constitution and specifically section 8 which limited and provides barriers on the power of congress. Unfortunitly, over time, unconstitutional laws and or actions by congress have eroded this principal and our federal government keeps over reaching its authority. In order to continue to preserve the overreaching laws, they must over reach again and again and again to enforce the previous unconstitutional over reaching laws/action. It like perpetual motion and our founding fathers new it was a risk. They called it Tyranny and we are seeing it now more than ever.
.
"When a government decides to convert privileges into "Rights", that government will and must become repressive. Our founders tried to protect the "people" from this situation and thus the constitution and specifically section 8 which limited and provides barriers on the power of congress."
How do you figure this anyway.? FDR, as a citizen, was merely talking or expounding on rights he thought necessary
for citizens to have as free people.. You claim the Constititution forbids even this. Then you use section 8 as a concrete code that is being used as tryanny against the PEOPLE (notice, all caps) to keep people enslaved not be ing permitted to elaborate their rights, or ununited. That is one of the key reasons Tom jefferson (and he could have signed latter), Patrick Henry , Andrew Jackson and a 1/3 of the Convention refused to sign the Constitution and why Washington had federal police drag attendees to the hall. The contentions surrounding the Constitution were many,,,as shown by newspaper and writings of the period. Most claimed the Constitution set up a rulership of central elitiest over and above the people; and your interpretations are an example. The Articles of Confederation is the true fredom baring document of the States. Why do you think some insisted on the B o R added......to elaborate on "rights"..?
Even so there remains some relief from this paralysis in the document:
Art2 section 3...gives the president duty to give a state of the union examination...in which such matters and measures shall be taken on as judged necessary.
To do this Art1, section 8..lastly says Congress shall make laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying out into execution of the foregoing pwers, AND ALL OTHER POWERS VESTED in this Constitution in the government of the US, OR in any department or offices thereof..( such as Article 2, section 3)
Then amend 10 The enumeration of rights in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. This means the Constitution shall not be used as a tyranny unto itself or to deny rights...or actions by the PEOPLE,,,such as solving their HC problems.
Likewise in amend 10 The powers not delegated to the US by the Con, nor prohibited by it to the Stae3s are reserved to the Staes respectively, OR TO THE PEOPLE. There is not constitutional tyranny allowed supposedly. People simply have rights and the power to do something about them.
...TM7
Everyone has those rights already. The only thing standing between you and those rights espoused by FDR is yourself. The government should have no role in directly guaranteeing those rights. Because if it does, it must institute oppressive force in order to give it to those who are too stupid or simply don't want it on their own. A good example of this is health care. The government is going to force/make people who don't want health care and forces them to buy it. That is oppressive.
I also said there is nothing wrong with those things that FDR espoused as long as they are feasable and done within the confines of the constitution. Replace the word "right" with the word "opportunity" and I'm okay with this as a set of ideas as a nation.
* The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
* The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
* The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
* The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
* The right of every family to a decent home;
* The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
* The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
* The right to a good education.
Since all these are already well within the grasp of every single American, the opportunity is there for the taking. I would argue, that issues such as affirmative action & quotas directly violate FDR's principals listed above. In the case of affirmative action and quotos, this goes directly to the point about the government determining specifically who gets these opportunities via oppressive/tyranny means. So affirmative action and quotes are in fact, unconstitutional. FDR should be rolling in his grave today.
