Yeah, yeah... I lied.
I know you, my non-existant readers, were looking forward to my lecture on how Christians don't follow Paul's teachings today. I really was going to post it, and maybe I'll edit it into my previous post eventually, but I've found a bigger fish to fry ... wait for it ... Public education is unconstitutional. Yep. You can thank your 13th Amendment for that one!
For you non-existant users who don't care to look it up or don't have it memorized:
AMENDMENT XIII
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
Note: A portion of Article IV, section 2, of the Constitution was superseded by the 13th amendment.
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.
(taken from archives.gov)
Now, as you can see, this was first created to put an end to slavery ... but it's possible not to interpret it that way. Here's the first definition of "servitude" from www.merriam-webster.com:
"Main Entry: ser·vi·tude
Pronunciation: 's&r-v&-"tüd, -"tyüd
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin servitudo slavery, from servus slave
1 : a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life"
Children are legally required to attend a school each day, (or study if they're home schooled, etc.) which is, last I checked, a course of action. That means that unless your child was convicted of stabbing someone to death, he doesn't have to go to school. Of course, this logic is completely irrational in this day and age, and it just goes to show how loose the wording within the Constitution is. No judge is going to strike the law stating children are legally required to attend school down, and I know that.
Onward and upward, this type of slip-up is why judges and Supreme Court Justices get away with legislating from the bench so often, and we all know what happens when they do that. Representatives and Senators, don't be so loose in phrasing when you propose a Constitutional amendment.
For you non-existant users who don't care to look it up or don't have it memorized:
AMENDMENT XIII
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
Note: A portion of Article IV, section 2, of the Constitution was superseded by the 13th amendment.
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.
(taken from archives.gov)
Now, as you can see, this was first created to put an end to slavery ... but it's possible not to interpret it that way. Here's the first definition of "servitude" from www.merriam-webster.com:
"Main Entry: ser·vi·tude
Pronunciation: 's&r-v&-"tüd, -"tyüd
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin servitudo slavery, from servus slave
1 : a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life"
Children are legally required to attend a school each day, (or study if they're home schooled, etc.) which is, last I checked, a course of action. That means that unless your child was convicted of stabbing someone to death, he doesn't have to go to school. Of course, this logic is completely irrational in this day and age, and it just goes to show how loose the wording within the Constitution is. No judge is going to strike the law stating children are legally required to attend school down, and I know that.
Onward and upward, this type of slip-up is why judges and Supreme Court Justices get away with legislating from the bench so often, and we all know what happens when they do that. Representatives and Senators, don't be so loose in phrasing when you propose a Constitutional amendment.
posted by Scott @ 5:37 PM
1 Comments:
At 7:28 PM,
Jake Porter said…
And if you think about it selective service is also unconstitutional as well as the draft.
Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution only gives congress permission to do eighteen things and the establishment of education is not one so the Dept. of Education and the No Child Left Behind Act are unconstitutional.
I always like to remind the people from the government who try and force me to take their test and give them my social security number and they get offended when I tell them what they are doing is illegal and my social security number is none of their d*** business.
Post a Comment
<< Home