States Rights Vs. United States

Was involved in a recent conversation on Facebook with a small crowd re what to do with the leftover pulp after juicing and received a variety of intriguing suggestions. From face masks to making paper to composts. One participant suggested we feed it to the worms in our worm bin. I'd need to acquire a worm bin first of course. And it might be a good idea to learn just what one needs a worm bin for in the first place before I do that. Case solved. Worms make excellent composters evidently.

Say what one will, but Facebook - like TV or a standing army for that matter - is an amazing tool if put in the right hands, just as it can be a useless inane or even dangerous weapon if placed in the wrong hands.

Got me to thinking. WA state where I live part time, just started residential composting for everyone. Every house now has three bins to put out every week. One for garbage one for recycling and one for compost. Very impressive. In the last year or two they have also legalized marijuana (seriously, as in yeah you can smoke it just because you enjoy it, imagine that), legalized gay / same sex marriage, and are now ardently working to outlaw the death penalty. What's next? Outlawing congressional lobbying and political campaign reform?!? (One can dream...)

These bold moved illustrate the power and effectiveness of States' Rights if a state and its residents so choose to act; and hopefully helps shed light on the overarching issue itself. More than anything one hopes it sets an example for others to follow and God willing encourages some to stop trying to encourage the Federal government to force national laws on the entire population as some of my more well meaning but short sighted friends insist they do.

The media and social networks nationwide are abuzz lately with blathering hyperbolic debates by both wonks and fools regarding a seemingly endless list of new laws some want to enforce on every man woman and child in the entire country in the United States. I've stated my case both publicly and to friends and lovers and thus am thoroughly tired of arguing about the issue. At this point I refuse to spend another precious minute debating it with anyone unless that person has the power to approve or veto a bill of law.

The way I see it, and this is only my opinion -- I am well aware of that fact, one of the greatest aspects of the United States of America is inherent right in its name. One just need take a few minutes, or hours if need be, and contemplate the words that make up the name of our great national experiment we call "a country". It's a fascinating exercise. We don't live in America. (as any central or south american will quickly remind you). Unlike people from most other countries, we live in a place called "the united STATES of America". One infers it is a collection of different areas or regions referred to as States that are all united behind a central theme or collection of values. One of the most endearing aspects of living in the U.S. is the variety of differences one can find by traveling around the country and personally experiencing each State and it's people for who they are as individuals and collectively as an independent state.

One interesting bit of history often forgotten about today is that the only way that the so called founding fathers got all the different states already established in The Colonies to ratify the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution (look this up to be exact...) was if the wording was changed to reflect that each state had its own inherent rights and would not be under strict control of a national government. Of course this has been almost completely done away with now. There are so many federal laws on the books now dictating what every state in the union can or cannot do that at times it seems that the only differentiating factor between one state or another is their state bird or flower. One can safely assume this is NOT what the founding fathers of this unheralded democratic experiment had in mind when constructing the general foundation of the country.

I have always asserted, since studying and pondering this issue, that the people who live in each state should be allowed to determine their own rules and laws as they see fit as long as they don't infringe on the safety or welfare or generally agreed upon human rights of others.

There are of course exceptions to every rule. Especially in extreme cases. Slavey was one such exception. But even today with all we've learned I personally am not totally convinced that the Northern states had a right to force the Southern states to stay a part of the so called Union or country against their will and abolish slavery. This is debatable of course. And perhaps it's more fodder for stimulating thought and debate than a worthwhile endeavor to be taken seriously. But scholars agree that the Northern states were motivated more by greed and economic concerns than by a desire to be of service to others or defend human rights. They would have never survived had the Southern states been allowed to start their own country. So they forced them to stay. There are a lot of lessons in that.

Perhaps it is an event we can lean from still. As we push and pull and morph in our ever burgeoning quest toward progress and further evolution we might be well served to allow each state to take responsibility for its own rules and laws jus this once, perhaps for a short period of time -- a year or two or three -- and see what comes of it. Certain compromises could be rewarded with benefits of being aligned with national or global consensus; and vice versa. This is a model that could be explored and expounded on for pages and pages.

In short I believe it can be summed up this way: if the entire southern half of the United States wants to be heartless sexist racist homophobic earth killing environment destroying gun-toting religious-extremist murderers, let's just let them and if one isn't happy living there they are free to move to a state more aligned with their own values. The fear and i believe it is a valid one is that constant enactment of broad sweeping national laws is a dangerous slippery slope that should frighten any forward thinking freedom loving citizen of the world.


- Posted by The Ambassador using BlogPress on an iPhone