LEXLOCI
1
2
3
4
5
However when the people of the state, the state government or the state judiciary legislate something they don't like, then they want the federal government to step in and overrule it. Thus in the brouhaha in Florida, over the presidential electoral count in the fall of 2000, when the Florida courts ruled against Bush, this states rights guy went to the federal government, first thing out of the box, and asked the fed to overrule the Florida courts. The principle and governing authority is states rights. However in this particular circumstance the state ruled against them. Thus the premises must changed or be modified. So the logic goes states rights except in cases when the courts are too liberal, or contain judges unqualified to rule correctly, are political appointees or do not have enough experience, blow their nose with their left hand or any rationale that will suffice in a pinch. The state of Oregon by voter initiative approved euthanasia. The Right are seeking to use the federal government to overrule it. 'Euthanasia will be misused.' 'Doctors should seek to sustain life not terminate it.' 'Murder by doctor will become rampant.' By voter initiative 3 states approved medical marijuana. They refuse to recognize the law, the will of the people, and are seeking to overturn it. 'No medical evidence for the use of marijuana', 'legalizing it for some, and soon it will become legal for all', 'bad precedent', 'opening the door to a nation of drug addicts'. Thus in every case the premises and arguments have nothing to do with the reality of the reasons these laws were created, but rather are constructed so as to support authority and principle.
IDEOLOGUE (5 OF 5)
DISSERTATION PAGE
