The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

State governments are a much greater threat to American rights than the national government

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/1/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 597 times Debate No: 64316
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




Over the years, American citizens have had rights, such as the due process clause and the right to free expression, infringed upon by various governmental bodies, namely the states. Long, drawn court battles have been fought against state governments in order to secure rights that have already been promised to U.S. citizens, such as in Mapp vs. Ohio (protection from unreasonable search and seizure), Skinner vs. Oklahoma (protection from "compulsory sterilization"), and Near vs. Minnesota (protection from prior restraint on a newspaper). The National government, on the other hand, has many less offenses to the rights of Americans as a whole, even coming to be an aid to the public through the use of welfare (a practice that has been, many a time, attempted to be stopped by states), Social Security (another program out of the same administration that would put power into the hands of the national government to help people) and many other programs meant to aid citizens that were attacked by many state governments as socialism.

To any who wish to challenge this, I have but one rule. Under no circumstances is the court case Korematsu vs. U.S. to be mentioned. Consider it a challenge to yourself, as I thought that the easiest counterpoint would be too easy.


Pro brings an important subject to the debating floor, our “National government.” A subject our government controlled educational system finds too taboo for classroom requirement, that is, the study of our “National government” relative to the US Constitution. Where in the US Constitution does today's oligarch in DC have the means to control your local schools, aka Common Core, telling kids what to eat, what books to use, what test to take, etc? The dictate of the Educational Department in DC is simply trashing the Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

What are Rights? According to Pro, “...rights, such as the due process clause and the right to free expression...” According to Thomas Jefferson, our rights are Unalienable Rights of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Jefferson's discovery of Rights are actually an outgrowth of the Constructal Law, which is an outgrowth of the Laws of Thermodynamics; a part of the physical Laws of Nature, not man-made.

The following video short, covers the Constructal Law:

The Constructal Law governs evolution in physics, biology, technology, and social organizations. This Law explains how everything that moves---whether animate or inanimate---naturally evolve in ways that facilitate such movement in the study of flow dynamics. Flow analysis, is the study of motion and currents relative to resistance.

Flow at the biological level, is a manifestation of life's primitive working function or bio-program which maintains, once alive, “Life” must have the freedom (“Liberty”) of flow or movement, in “the pursuit (energy to overcome resistance) of ” survival; otherwise, there is no life. Since we have life, survival is a form of positive-feedback the mechanism of adaptation, procreation, a prerequisite for human “Happiness,” etc. Hence, Jefferson's celebrated polished version of this bio-program, which he declares to be “self-evident” and labeled Unalienable Rights of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

These Rights are a dynamic bio-program interface with nature, where all “Life” has a craving to sustain, improve and prolong itself, with the desire to increase freedom (“Liberty”), while decreasing the energy (taking the path of least resistance) in “the pursuit of” an objective, and in the process, exploring new levels of positive-feedback (“Happiness” for us humans). This bio-program is the foundation for the “Natural Selection” process; the machinery of evolution for life, social systems, technologies, free-markets, etc.

The US Constitution's design was to protect and embrace the individual's Unalienable Rights from the crimes of others and from the crimes of government, no more, no less. The state and local governments do all the rest.

The government with most control is the local government who is close to the people. The state has less control, the Federal government in DC has even less control over the people. That is the way our Republic was designed. ttp://

A greater insight on the US Constitution is found in the Federalist Papers:

There are few private colleges who have no connection to the dictates from the Educational Department in DC. For example, Hillsdale College is one of the colleges free from central government control.

Hillsdale offers a number of free online courses on government and the US Constitution. Courses you will not find in our government controlled schools.

Our form of governance (US Constitution) sparked a social experiment within a short period of 200-years, changed the world like no other society in recorded history, through the fruits of technology, food production, and medicine, the stables of human existence throughout the world today. A compelling example of what happens when our Unalienable Rights are free to flow, having minimal resistance (Constructal Law), within the awesome machinery of nature.

Having the mission to embrace and protect everyone's Unalienable Rights, the US started with a difficult task relative to the cultural reality of the day. Cultural norms do not change overnight, because they are inherently Conservative. For example, slavery and woman's standing in society were deeply rooted in the culture, including the norms of the ruling-class, for they too reflect the culture of the day. Our founding Fathers knew Unalienable Rights will remove cultural ills, as a result, slavery, the treatment of woman, etc, in time during the evolution of culture as a function of our Unalienable Rights and the design of Congress, representing the people (the House), the states (the Senate), and the only branch to make law correcting such cultural ills by embracing and protecting the individual’s Unalienable Rights.

Life's Unalienable Rights are the evolution engine of life. These Rights are also the engine for social evolution, if, and only if, the configuration of governance supports such natural engine at the social level. The US Founding Fathers develop a configuration of government supporting evolution before Darwin came on the stage.

Eighty some years later, Darwin's work eventually came to light, where scholars in political science throughout the world at the turn of the last century, adopted a perverted view of evolution known as Social Darwinism. Our founding Fathers viewed the foundation of the rule of law (the US Constitution) to be stable (Conservative) within a Newtonian context making the structure of our Constitution difficult to change via the Amendment process. All that changed during the dynasty of the former President Woodrow Wilson (a leading father of modern Liberal Progressivism) was a promoter of the Social Darwinism ideology, advocating little resistance to constitutional structural change, shifting power from local government, power from the states to the oligarch in DC. In his book Wilson stated:

Living political constitutions must be Darwinian in structure and in practice.”

Wilson also took issue with the individual’s Unalienable Rights, where he went on to say:

No doubt a great deal of nonsense has been talked about the inalienable rights of the individual, and a great deal that was mere vague sentiment and pleasing speculation has been put forward as fundamental principle.”

Clearly, Wilson rejected the foundation of the US Constitution and started a slow cancer known as the “living constitution.” The indoctrination of progressivism, through our government controlled educational system, is a spark of genius from generations of powerbrokers to embrace big tyrannical central government via progressive liberal ideology, while demeaning Conservatism---the desire to preserve our Constitutional structure. Tyranny is on the increase from the ruling-class oligarch in DC. A tyranny that could incarcerate, or spoil your day, or freeze your bank accounts, etc.; for there are so many laws on the books, on the average we commit 3 felonies a day.

As Lavrenti Beria, chief of Josef Stalin's secret police, once stated, “You bring me the man, I’ll find you the crime.” Beria's logic is reflected in those IRS tyrannical scandals, under endless investigations until the media loses interest.

Funny how many in the US, still feels they live in a free country. Compliments to our government controlled educational system.

In closing, Wilson rejected the foundation of the US Constitution, by starting a slow cancer known as the progressive liberal “living constitution,” and this cancer is starting to metastasize. Today's Congress represents the lobbyist not the people, while the President has a “pen and a phone” to make law, and also, the administration branch (a fourth branch not part of the US Constitution’s three branches) is made up of hundreds of departments (IRS, NSA, EPA, etc.). These departments employ hundreds of thousands of government employees, who are not elected, writing regulations having the same power as law, to control, monitor us, etc. Our courts are out of control making modifications to law or new law, as the Justice Department enforcing only those laws by Presidential decree. Today, the people are essentially out of the loop, except on Election Day, and look what choices we have, as our state and local governments become appendages to DC. Last, but not least, our morphing from a republic to a socialistic oligarch will be our demise by the Laws of Economics:

The national government is a much greater threat to American rights than the state governments!
Debate Round No. 1


novatheunderstanding forfeited this round.


How fitting, Pro decided to forfeit on Election Day. And in saying that, I hope all US folks go out and vote today. For voting is "The Great Debate!"
Debate Round No. 2


novatheunderstanding forfeited this round.


Election Day is over, election for this non-debate begins.

Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Mike_10-4 2 years ago
Sorry about the repetition. My DSL went down and a retry gave the impression of stressing a point.
Posted by Mike_10-4 2 years ago

You made a very good point in your comment relative to our, "" freedom to move to a state that is not oppressive." This was one of the key factors in a link I referenced in Round 1, where I had the misfortune of a typographical error. Here is the correct link:
Posted by Mike_10-4 2 years ago

You made a very good point in your comment relative to our, "" freedom to move to a state that is not oppressive." This was one of the key factors in a link I referenced in Round 1, where I had the misfortune of a typographical error. Here is the correct link:
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
One thing that is not brought out. If a state passes laws, you have the freedom to move to a state that is not oppressive. But if the feds pass a law, where would you go to escape it?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture