Is "states rights" codeword for "don't interfere with my ability to discriminate" from Cons?

Question

Remember, Southern Cons screamed "states rights" during slavery, and "states rights" during Jim Crow.

Cons are still screaming "states rights" today, this time in regards to gay rights.

Answer 1

Conservatives always go back to the "States Rights" Banner whenever they want to permit legalized discrimination and sodomy in the Southern States.

Answer 2

The people in the Southern "Jim Crow" States were not Conservative Republicans. They were racist fascist Democrats. They were not in support of the Constitution. These were people like Senator Al Gore Sr. Senator William Fulbright, Senator Robert Byrd etc.



We conservatives support, honor and defend the Constitution of the United States, particularly the restrictions it puts on the power of the Federal Government. Just because some radical Democrats tried to hide behind the exclusionary clause to excuse their abhorrent behavior and hatred doesn't make defending the Constitution a bad thing. Remember it was Republican President Eisenhower who sent the 101st Airborne to Arkansas to enforce the Constitution. I am old enough to remember. Ike was a "Con".



*



EDIT- you are confusing the term "Right" as it applies to American politics. The Southern Racist Democrats were not to the Right of the Northern Republicans. The terms Left and Right in America are different than in Europe.



Here the model is a long line with Moderate in the center. Moving Left you find Liberal/Progressive then Socialist then Totalitarian. Starting in the center and moving Right you find Conservative then Libertarian then Anarchy. For Southern Democrats to be to the Right of Conservatives, they would have to be for even more individual rights and Liberty not less. To be quite honest, if they were anything it would be akin to Fascists. Fascism is another form of Totalitarianism and that, too, is on the Left not the Right in America.



It is in European politics that Socialism is on the Left and Fascism is on the Right. But their model is very different. That political model is more like a pair of railroad tracks heading in one direction with Socialism as the Left rail and Fascism as the Right rail. But both have Totalitarianism as the destination. This is due to the legacy of monarchy in Europe. We have no such legacy.



**



EDIT- Man are you misinformed about Ike. The Interstate Highway system was built for National Defense! Ike realized the importance of being able to move men and material from coast to coast and border to border in the event of war and there wasn't any way to do that in America. We had only "routes" mapped out that ran through small towns, single lane roads, over weak bridges etc. The issue was National Defense. That is why all the even numbered interstates run East and West and the odd numbered interstates run North and South. A military convoy or individual vehicles would always know which road to take based on the direction they wanted to go. They were also built with long, unobstructed straight sections every so many miles to serve as makeshift runways for military aircraft.



He didn't make the tax rate 91%. It was 91% but loaded with all manner of loopholes so no one actually paid that. It was that way before Ike got there. He and most Americans supported Unions back then. That was when they were still needed, before there were all manner of laws protecting employees and controlling working conditions. As far as his warning about the undue influence on scientific research and education by the Military Industrial Complex he was right about the undue influence of Federal research dollars only it turns out it wasn't the MIC but rather, Liberal Environmental Fascism that ended up doing that. Watch his farewell speech below, but instead of Military Industrial Complex, substitute the words "Environmental Activism" and he is right on the money. He got the threat right but from it came from a movement that didn't exist yet.



***

Answer 3

To some, maybe. But there are legitimate arguments for stronger state powers, in theory. Consider northern states, for example. Stronger state rights would not be too shabby in areas like Connecticut or Maryland. More power at the local level theoretically is more efficient.



But then when you have states like Mississippi (which according to HDI ranks in some areas like a lower second world nation)... well... their agenda is different.



Interestingly enough, the states screaming states rights the loudest also have the highest rates of food stamp recipients and other forms of welfare. I wonder what would happen if we not only removed those benefits, but also moved military bases and other government agencies out of those states?

Answer 4

Another left wing loon making things up. The southern DEMOCRATS were the pro-slavery ones and the supporters of the Jim Crow laws so your argument has no merit.



Under the constitution the states have the greater rights. The federal government has far exceeded its authority time and again. It has nothing to do with discrimination. That is only a fallacious attempt to justify the criminal behavior of the federal government.



Gay rights is another stupid argument. You cannot tell us a single right the gays do not have that straight people have. Not a single one. All you are doing is twisting facts and lying.



@ Name calling and wild claims do not support your stand. It only demonstrates your level of maturity.

Answer 5

True, Southern Democrats talked about states rights during slavery, and I suppose during Jim Crow, but the Democrats don't control the South anymore. Even so, "states rights" is a codeword for the rights of the State under the US Constitution....

Answer 6

That's public education for you. We are a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC. United States of America was formed by several individual governments forming a unity of common defense. States are suppose to govern their people, and serve their best interests.

Answer 7

They also do not like it when federal courts prevents them from doing things that are contrary to the bill of rights, school prayers, invading privacy, fair trials, etc. but do not support states rights in legalizing marijuana or assisted suicide.

Answer 8

Read the 10th. Now show me in the Constitution where marriage is a right...show me where healthcare is a right...show me where elderly and poverty healthcare is a right.....show me where retirement savings is a right.....Now if it's not expressly written in the Constitution, where does the 10th amendment tell people to look?

Answer 9

gays have all the rights anyone else has,marriage is a state issue not a federal one,also by definition marriage is between a man and a woman

Answer 10

You're just a federal government bootlicker...you are clueless when it comes to freedom and self governance.

Answer 11

No, that's the First Amendment.

Answer 12

No, it's code for following the constitution.



lp

Answer 13

Yes it is. Always has been. BUT they do not want states rights when it comes to campaign finance or any other issue where it doesn't suite their agenda.