Merged James Madison on Various Topics

[JoeTheJuggler]

"Ignorance of the law is no excuse".

That means the laws must be short and relatively simple for a civilized society to function properly.

No, it does not.

Also, where does "ignorance of the law is no excuse" appear in the U.S. Constitution?

In fact, in many cases, the mens rea is an essential element of the crime. Things like intentionally and knowingly breaking a law compared to accidentally breaking a minor regulation due to ignorance is in fact taken into account very often.

ETA: So would you like to try again to respond to my challenges to your assertion that big and complex laws are inherently bad?

If you believe that big and complex legislation is wrong, do you suppose the healthcare bill is the first ever big and complex bill? (I gave examples of other large legislation passed by Republican-controlled Congresses.)

Why is big and complex legislation bad when the subject of it is also big and complex? Should we simply outlaw any institution (like healthcare) that is big and complex? It was a lot simpler back in the days when the practice of medicine was crude and simple, and mostly ineffective fatal.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Yeah, I mean, until Galileo told us about him, nobody had ever heard of this Madison guy!

Or that Galileo fellow, for that matter. It took someone using his name as a JREF forum userid for anyone to have even heard that name before.

 

[joobz]

things that Madison knew nothing about, because he died before he could:
1.) Origin of Humankind (evolution) and the meaninglessness of race
2.) a full 48 continental United states.
3.) the 50 states of the US.
4.) WW I, WWII
5.) The cold war
6.) Cars, airplanes
7.) Nuclear power
8.) Integrated world economy
9.) Women's Suffrage
10.) DNA
11.) The computer
12.) The internet
13.) The telephone, cellphone, PDA, Wireless communication devices..
14.) GPS
15.) 24h news cycle
16.) girls-gone-wild videos, spring break, wet T-Shirt contests...
17.) The civil rights movement
18.) Israel
19.) global warming
20.) Sears Tower, Empire states Building, Dubai constructions...
21.) genetic engineering, mass agriculture, cheap textiles.
22.) Plastics
23.) In god we trust on the dollar

The list goes on and on and on and on and on. The America that Madison knew is NOT the same america we have now. And that (on the whole) is a good thing. We can not blindly rely on his (or any founding father's words) simply because we respect them. We must apply our own reasoning to every simple setting.

So, now without using Madison (who can't possibly weigh in intelligently on a modern setting), Is it right in 2010 for our nation (ANY NATION) to help out another in a time of need?

 

[Galileo]

things that Madison knew nothing about, because he died before he could:
1.) Origin of Humankind (evolution) and the meaninglessness of race

James Madison knew about Malthus, that's good enough.

2.) a full 48 continental United states.

We were over half way there.

3.) the 50 states of the US.

ditto.

4.) WW I, WWII

JM knew about the 2nd Punic War and the 30-years war. And the wars of Napoleon as well.

5.) The cold war

He knew about the crusades.

6.) Cars, airplanes

not relavent to politics. He knew about locomative trains late in life and it did not faze him.

7.) Nuclear power

He knew that energy was increasing because of the industrial revolution and the steam engine.

8.) Integrated world economy

It was already integrated and getting more so each year, especially after the Warof 1812.

9.) Women's Suffrage

One of the reasons our society has decayed, unqualified people are voting.

10.) DNA

has nothing to do with politcal theories.

11.) The computer

he knew about the abacus, good enough.

12.) The internet

no different than the decentralized communication of the 1800s.

13.) The telephone, cellphone, PDA, Wireless communication devices..

He did not envision TV and radio. This is the only place where your points are relevant.

14.) GPS

who cares?

15.) 24h news cycle

see # 13

16.) girls-gone-wild videos, spring break, wet T-Shirt contests...

17.) The civil rights movement

JM was the civl rights movement, he wrote the Bill-of-Rights.

18.) Israel

He had the Barbary pirates instead, same difference.

19.) global warming

Thereis no global warming, but if there was, it would open up the NW passage.

20.) Sears Tower, Empire states Building, Dubai constructions...

He knew population densities were increasing in the big cities.

21.) genetic engineering, mass agriculture, cheap textiles.

They already had a lot of cheap products, there are just more of them now. Madison was an expert on monetary theory, and even pointed out errors in Austrian economics.

22.) Plastics

with slave labor, this was not a big deal. But Madison advocated ending slavery.

23.) In god we trust on the dollar

Since there is no God, putting trust in him is a hell of a bad idea. Madison did not believe that Bible BS.

The list goes on and on and on and on and on. The America that Madison knew is NOT the same america we have now. And that (on the whole) is a good thing. We can not blindly rely on his (or any founding father's words) simply because we respect them. We must apply our own reasoning to every simple setting.

So, now without using Madison (who can't possibly weigh in intelligently on a modern setting), Is it right in 2010 for our nation (ANY NATION) to help out another in a time of need?

Madison is a 21st century expert on policy issues. He is a policy wonk. He wrote the timeless principles of good government.

 

[joobz]

James Madison knew about Malthus, that's good enough.


We were over half way there.



ditto.



JM knew about the 2nd Punic War and the 30-years war. And the wars of Napoleon as well.



He knew about the crusades.



not relavent to politics. He knew about locomative trains late in life and it did not faze him.



He knew that energy was increasing because of the industrial revolution and the steam engine.



It was already integrated and getting more so each year, especially after the Warof 1812.



One of the reasons our society has decayed, unqualified people are voting.



has nothing to do with politcal theories.



he knew about the abacus, good enough.

12.) The internet

no different than the decentralized communication of the 1800s.



He did not envision TV and radio. This is the only place where your points are relevant.



who cares?



see # 13







JM was the civl rights movement, he wrote the Bill-of-Rights.



He had the Barbary pirates instead, same difference.



Thereis no global warming, but if there was, it would open up the NW passage.



He knew population densities were increasing in the big cities.



They already had a lot of cheap products, there are just more of them now. Madison was an expert on monetary theory, and even pointed out errors in Austrian economics.



with slave labor, this was not a big deal. But Madison advocated ending slavery.



Since there is no God, putting trust in him is a hell of a bad idea. Madison did not believe that Bible BS.



Madison is a 21st century expert on policy issues. He is a policy wonk. He wrote the timeless principles of good government.

None of those points actually refute my statements.
Madisons america isn't modern america.
the end.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

9.) Women's Suffrage

One of the reasons our society has decayed, unqualified people are voting.

The motivation behind your defense of wife-beater Kevin Barrett and wife-slayer OJ Simpson is becoming clear.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Your dismissal of Joobs' points shows how absurd your thinking is.

You don't really think the abacus had the same effect on society in Madison's day that the computer has on ours?

You couldn't possibly think that the crusades were the same as the Cold War.

And there's no way you really believe that cars and airplanes are "not relavent [sic] to politics".

Your posts are usually pretty nonsensical and absurd, but now you're being disingenuous too.

 

[joobz]

I only read the first 3 responses when I realized you were givening short nonsensical arguments. I completely missed the gems of:

not relavent to politics. He knew about locomative trains late in life and it did not faze him.

The inherent infrastructure surround rapid travel and the speed of which resolutions and negotiations can be made because of their existence is not insignificant. Indeed, it is BECAUSE we have the travel capabilities we have now, that we have a dependence on foreign oil. it is BECAUSE we have mass transport capabilities that we have a global economy.

Your ignorance on this topic is astounding.

He knew that energy was increasing because of the industrial revolution and the steam engine.

He didn't know of the devistation that it could cause. He didn't know that we would have power to destroy everyone.

One of the reasons our society has decayed, unqualified people are voting.

Did you mean to demonstrate yourself to be one of the "unqualified"?

has nothing to do with politcal theories.

DNA is the lynchpin in evolutionary theory. IT is the basis, chemical basis, for why race is meaningless. It is the fundamental target for gene therapy and tissue engineering. Our knowledge of DNA is inherent in our medical system. Our understanding of the function of DNA is critical to the usage of stem cell therapy. I've given you just now 3 separate political issues (racism, health care, and stem cell therapy) that require knowledge of DNA to speak intelligently on the subject. There are more ways it informs our political views, but I do not need to go into it any further. I've already shown why you are wrong.

he knew about the abacus, good enough.

actually, He would have known about the slide rule. A much more powerful calculating device. Even your attempt to dissmiss my point demonstrates your complete ignorance.

It's a demonstration of the different cultural background we have than what Madison was exposed to. Are you claiming that culture doesn't inform our political view?

 

[FlamingMoe]

So, now without using Madison (who can't possibly weigh in intelligently on a modern setting), Is it right in 2010 for our nation (ANY NATION) to help out another in a time of need?

If it is, we shouldn't have any problem amending the Constitution to allow it.

 

[joobz]

If it is, we shouldn't have any problem amending the Constitution to allow it.

where does the constitution forbid it?

 

[FlamingMoe]

where does the constitution forbid it?

Since the tenth amendment explicitly states the federal government has only those power delegated to it by the Constitution, it doesn't have to forbid it.

 

[joobz]

Since the tenth amendment explicitly states the federal government has only those power delegated to it by the Constitution, it doesn't have to forbid it.

But, that only deals with states rights. And since the constitution forbids state by state involvement in foreign affairs, it's a power left to the federal government.

article 1, Section 10.

 

[FlamingMoe]

But, that only deals with states rights.

False.

 

[joobz]

False.

article 1, Section 10.


ETA: again, what action are you claiming is unconstitutional?

 

[FlamingMoe]

article 1, Section 10.

That's just prohibitions on state actions. Since your claim that the tenth amendment is solely a state's rights protection is false, I don't know why you bring A.I,S.10 up again.

ETA: again, what action are you claiming is unconstitutional?

Federal foreign aid. You know, the thing we've been talking about?

 

[joobz]

you are right. It is state and and personal rights

Federal foreign aid. You know, the thing we've been talking about?

what form of aid do you oppose? (this gets into why I bring in states rights)
And how does (again) the constitution prohibit federal foreign aide?

For instance, if we are discussing military aide, neither states or person has the right to provide it.

IF we are talking about monetary aide, Federal monetary aide doesn't infringe upon your right to provide or not provide aide. So, again, I do not see how the 10th amendment applies in this case.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I'm with Galileo on this. The federal government really should not be assisting Haiti in this way. Strong Federalist principles really do oppose this sort of expansion of the role of the federal government.
On the other hand, Americans, and private organizations, should be doing everything we can.

 

[AvalonXQ]

where does the constitution forbid it?

You're asking the question backwards. The federal government is a government of limited powers, and therefore only has the powers that it is explicitly granted by the Constitution.
The question is not, "Where does the Constitution forbid it", but rather, "Where does the Constitution explicitly or implicitly grant the power to do it?" Because, as assumed implicitly in the Constitution and stated explicitly in the Tenth Amendment, powers not expressly granted aren't granted at all.

 

[joobz]

You're asking the question backwards. The federal government is a government of limited powers, and therefore only has the powers that it is explicitly granted by the Constitution.

I understand that, but it hasn't been demonstrated that such aide ISN'T within the listed powers. In particular Article 1 section 8.

 

[FlamingMoe]

what form of aid do you oppose? (this gets into why I bring in states rights)

The kind that comes from the federal government.

And how does (again) the constitution prohibit federal foreign aide?

By not explicitly providing for it.

So, again, I do not see how the 10th amendment applies in this case.

Because the tenth amendment prohibits the federal government from exercising powers not granted to it. If you can find "that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents" then we can talk. (See wot I did thar? Tied it back to the OP...)