ralis

Not every law is needs to be scrutinized by the DOJ. However, when it comes to tyranny, discrimination, equal rights, corruption and so forth a central government is of necessity. Amazing how your state is allowing corruption at the highest levels and you say nothing. Art Pope is the symbol of corruption and I suppose that is a right if the people of NC deem it so?

I said the states that were restricted under the Voting Rights Act which would include all states that seek to restrict voting rights. The Southern states were the worst! List of Jim Crow laws. Note that almost every state is Southern with the exception of Wyoming. http://www.ferris.edu/htmls/news/jimcrow/origins/images/jimcrowlaws.pdf

North Carolina's new voter ID laws are being challenged by the DOJ. Some might argue that NC has every right to require ID, limit early voting, eliminate same day registration and so forth. Yet this was never an issue until Obama took office along with SCOTUS gutting the 'Voting Rights Act (section 4). The states that were required to submit documentation to the DOJ to change voting laws before this irrational decision by SCOTUS, rushed to make drastic changes within 48 hours to pass restrictive new laws. Those same states were the most egregious in voting rights violations against African Americans (Jim Crow Laws). http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/09/30/227591062/justice-department-to-sue-north-carolina-over-voter-id-law

I have studied those dark times and you are correct. For this reason as well as myriad others, religion must remain separate from government. I wonder what spell she used?

I agree that more of the story will be revealed soon. What does your intimate knowledge of Cherokees have to do with this? Why so vague?

I know exactly what the government is doing so don't accuse me of seeing the world though 'rose colored glasses'. My objection is in regards to the propaganda of Libertarian Ayn Rand objectivism being foisted on the gullible public. The divisive issue of 'states rights' is based on Libertarian values and most have not thought it through. I have asked for concrete examples as to what 'state's rights' entails and the answers given are vague generalizations that lack critical thinking. For example, what if the majority in a given state were to institute the owning of slaves as a legal right? What about a state sponsored religion? If an atheist refused to comply with a right wing oppressive state religion, what are the legal consequences for that individual? There are some in Oklahoma that believe that Christianity is the religion of that state. The fundamentalists refer to Oklahoma as 'faith based'. That is code for right wing 'Southern Baptist' fundamentalism. What about a tyranny of a small minority over a majority? Right now there is a legal battle over same sex marriage. Fundamentalists believe that this nation was founded on Christian principles and same sex marriage is illegal/immoral and some states such as Utah are fighting to keep it that way. Marriage has become a state/church sponsored legal affair. Have you read this thread? http://thetaobums.com/topic/33313-oklahoma-usa-christains-again-15-year-old-student-suspended-for-casting-a-wiccan-spell-on-her-teacher/#entry513653

In the 'good ole days', if the Witch floated on top of the water, then she was guilty. If she sank to the bottom and drowned she was innocent and pure.

The 'bible belt' people love 'that old time religion'. Which one are they referring to? Could you post a link? I guess I missed your post. Thanks.

There are some here that believe that 'states rights' should prevail and that a state religion is perfectly acceptable. Historians have provided ample documentation of state sponsored religions and the abuse of.

thanks for bringing this to our attention!

Who are you referring to? Did you pick that one up from your favorite Libertarian/Tea Bagger site? I seriously doubt you have studied the history of that era, read any historical documentation or even books documenting the horror of the Nazi regime! I guess It is fun to quote while ignoring facts, which proves what?

Arguing over superior cultures or whatever is useless. Read the current genetic research and understand how we are all related. Africa! http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/talking-back/2012/07/26/out-of-africa-startling-new-genetics-of-human-origins/ http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics

So called Civil War? It was just that, in spite of persons in the South calling it 'the war between the states'. What rule-of-law was discarded? Given that I am current on the political situation in NC, it would be in other readers interest for you to explain your position on such matters. NC is not a great state and is moving far to the right. Replete with bigotry, Art Pope (ally of the Koch bros.) a tool of corruption, egregious new anti voting rights laws and so forth.

We spent a week out there a month ago and it was great. Encountered some prospectors looking for the 'Lost Dutchman Mine'.

The 'Siphon Draw' trail in the Superstitions is a fantastic hike!

The state of Utah imposing religious moral values. Bigotry and fascism. This is one reason why the states rights issue is a bogus argument. Utah Will Not Recognize Same-Sex Marriages That Have Already Been Performed: Governor's Office http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/08/utah-gay-marriage_n_4562488.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0wuTnjwUk0

Gordita is also a food. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordita

I was through there years ago. I have ancestral roots (1800's) in NC and Tennessee. Beautiful country. What you call mountains are just foothills compared to the Rocky Mountains out here.

Being aware of those old tapes is 99% of the work.

It has been derailed and it shows sort attention span, failure to engage in critical thinking by some and personal religious agendas.

The OP is not in regards to moral attributes of the ten commandments or any other divine law. The discussion is one of Constitutional law vs. states rights.

I agree but there seems to be a love of states rights by you. Are you of the Antonin Scalia persuasion that the Constitution is a dead document as opposed to a progressive one that must function in a modern culture?

I have no misunderstanding whatsoever in this regard. Most persons don't understand the legal roots of this discussion and can easily be influenced to disregard reason. I still think you are not clearly stating your position on this. This culture has progressed and become much more complex since the founding of this country. The Constitution is not a dead document but a living one that can and must be adaptable to current society. Furthermore, slavery was legal under the framing of the Constitution and women could not vote. Need I say more? "nunya bidness." An urban street slang is correct in this context? I don't think so.

I read it and you seem to be advocating states rights in this issue? However, I may not have read your post completely but was making assumptions on past arguments we have had. Possibly, that your position was not clearly stated on this matter?