[rlp]

Does the U.S. Constitution authorize congress to force Americans to buy health insurance?


"The Truth is that Congress is NOT authorized to pass laws just because a majority in Congress say the laws promote the “general welfare”!






See article;

Does the U.S. Constitution authorize congress to force Americans to buy health insurance?

[Guardian]

It is amazing what our elected officials deem is within the realm of their responsibilities as far as our General Welfare isn't it.

What they deem pursuit of happiness and what we deem pursuit of happiness usually clash.

I agree with you 100% on this. Government is intruding by leaps and bounds into the private lifes of it's citizens, some would say it's started, some would say it's coming, time will tell.

[TaintRight]

Anyone reading the US Constitution will be stunned at how limited the powers granted the central authority really are. Better said, they'd be stunned at how far that central authority has outstripped its bounds.

[Jim]

Ant it so, I'll Bet most of them have not read the constatution or the The Deckloration of Independece or the Bill of rights as there wrote for the most part in commen English and not legelease gobaly goop the probaly wood not comprahand what they were reading anyway.

[kevin]

The founding fathers would be leaders of the modern Tea Parties if they were here today. They never did, said or wrote anything that I know of which would lead anyone to believe they would support Government Gone Wild!

[Pat/Rick]

UnConstitutional.Period. 99% of the alphabet agencies are unConstitutional as well. Our founding fathers would be wondering why our muskets wern't loaded. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. A corrupt government supported by a corrupt judiciary. Exercise your right of jury nullification.

[Screaming Eagle]

obama even admits that 'his view' of the Constitution is very different from what 'most people' say it means. He's essentially admitting that he's perfectly okay with trampling on it (not that Bush et al didn't) and has no moral compunction about it. What more should we expect? And now I will most carefully restrain my mouth/fingers...

I thought this was going to be about the pledge that every single soldier (draftee or enlisted) took when on induction into the military. What we need to ask ourselves is if the pledge we made at that time still applies to each of us regardless of our connection with the federal goobermint today. Is that STILL a solemn pledge that we are bound morally to 'work out' in defending the Constitution against enemies foreign AND domestic? I could throw in a lot of 'what if's' but it's a daunting question.

[muddog15]

I wonder sometimes, however, with our government education system,,, how many people are aware that we are not supposed to be a Democracy. And our founding fathers hated the idea of Democracy as much as they hated other forms of government at that time. A lot of people have been brain washed and don't realize it.

[Pat/Rick]

My pledge cited the defense of the Constitution, not a political agenda. No one at Ft. Dix told me that when I ETS, I am no longer bound by oath. If, there is ever a total trampling of the Constitution to substitute oh, I don't know, say a UN resolution of how we as a nation should live, then yes, I feel obligated to defend the Constitution and the sovereignty of that which is America. Anyone who would defend a total destruction of our Constitution that has taken the oath is a dishonorable person. IMO

[Unswydd]

These last few posts make me think of the oathkeepers. I belong here in Illinois but as Joe Citizen. I never took that all important oath for the military but think it is important to support them in any way I can.