One problem I have with Tea Party members challenging their local congressman at Town hall meetings is the Tea Party members are extraordinarily ignorant, and the members of congress know exactly what they are talking about. Here we have a video of Rep Pete Stark saying the federal government can do pretty much anything it wants, including forcing third party players to pay fourth party players for actions between first and second parties (as in the new "health care" legislation). The woman in this film tries to say it is a violation of the 13th amendment, "which outlaws slavery in USA."
Really. The original constitution dealt with slavery in a way that would eventually eliminate it. After the civil war, the Republicans made slavery a permanent part of USA, in the 13th amendment, which apparently this woman cannot read for comprehension. It is quite short, let's read it ourselves:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[2]
See that word "except," it means there is an exception to the rule. That exception is slavery is OK in USA, when the government does it. The government has done it many times, but just never to you, so you do not mind. If you resist health care, and don't join, you will be duly convicted, and then enslaved. So the feds can do anything they want, with due process (congressional action) include enslave us in a health care system. Party on Tea People, you have no idea what you are doing.
2 comments:
except as punishment for a crime! You say there is an exception to the rule and then completely miss what the narrow exception is. Slavery isn't ok when the Government does it, it is only ok when it is slavery in the sense of punishment for a crime.
Fail...
Fail only from a hamiltonian perspective in which preemptive war, torture, war on noncombatants, bailouts and gitmo are allowed, along with slavery. All of these are wrong, no matter who does it.
They who composed the 13th Amendment knew exactly what they meant when they said slavery, they meant slavery USA style, which was and is wrong under all circumstances. The jeffersonians, to whom the constitution was pitched, wrote a document that anticipated slavery disappearing, because slavery is wrong.
After the civil war, the republicans, and their defenders today, enshrined slavery as a permanent part of USA, at the constitutional level. It is wrong in any circumstances. Govt used this law to enslave vagrants and work them to death in Mississippi. The ex-slaves called it worse than death. Only government can make an evil institution worse. No slave owner would work a slave to death.
Circumstances do not matter when something is inherently evil: slavery is legal in usa, and the 13th amendment clearly says so. Slavery is wrong. That it is allowed when government convicts somebody of something, does not make it right.
Post a Comment