Federal "School Lunch Program" - ??
What article or clause of the Constitution is used to justify the "Federal School Lunch Program"? How on earth is this Constitutional??
General welfare? Commerce? You should know by now they don't check to be sure something is constitutional anymore.
Originally Posted by me3
THE STARVING CHILDREN!
forealz. starving children need foods bro.
but the state can handle it right?
"You know not what you are given, but forever will you know what has been taken away from you..."
"As long as we live beyond our means we are destined to live beneath our means." - Ron Paul at a CNBC Debate in Michigan (10/09/07)
I don't think "general welfare" is even invoked, because it's clearly not intended for that type of thing. How could the Commerce Clause apply?????
Usually some BS excuse like food crosses state lines.
How does that have anything to do with a federal "school lunch" program? This nonsense NEEDS TO STOP. There is no way this could actually be legal.
You're not really making any new arguments. The same could be said for 99% of what the federal government does.
I'm asking in this one specific case - federal school lunch programs - how it has been justified legally. Specifically this one program?
i think his point is that this program has NOT been justified legally, nor have 99.9% of any other federal programs..
Well what are we waiting for? It's time to challenge this nonsense.
The Constitution does not spell out every possible thing which can and cannot be done. It mostly says who is repsonsible for what- the division of powers of government. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives can initiate legislation. The internet is not mentioned in the Constitution- maybe we should have it banned. Show me where it is mentioned in the document!
The School Lunch program is the product of legislation. If you don't like the program, try to have the legislation changed.Article I
Section 1.
All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
You mentioned that the internet is not mentioned in the Constitution, and could theoretically be banned. It is important to remember that the Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights and the subsequent amendments, do not give rights. Rights are inherent, and from natural law; the Constitution merely state some of the rights which the government cannot legally infringe. This makes a big difference. Rather than having the few rights as listed in the Constitution, we are supposed to have the rights already. The Founding Fathers even argued over having a Bill of Rights, as it would not list every protected right, but they had decided that half a loaf is better than no loaf at all.
What the Constitution does do, is list the rules by which the government is to operate, and the Constitution does not seem to allow for a federal school lunch program.
I know this is a thread hijack, but can one still call himself a "stud" if he's wearing suspenders?
Just curious.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us