Could there be a better definition today of socialism?

Question

"Fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies."

Somewhere when reading the constitution I missed the part about fairness. Is this a new leftist right?

Answer 1

Haven't you read the new amended Constitution written by the modern Liberals? They've taken out all that pesky stuff that got in the way of them trying to change the U.S. in ways that would have been appalling to the Founding Fathers.

The amended document now says:

"Freedom FROM religion"

"The Right to bear arms shall reside solely with the Federal Government"

Regarding treason, Article 3 of the Constitution will have the clause "giving them aid and comfort" removed so that Liberals can more easily sabotage our efforts to bring Democracy to the less fortunate.

The problem with Liberals is that they'll eat up anything new law that uses terminology like "fairness", "compassion", "equality", that they don't even understand that they are being duped into accepting Socialism.

Answer 2

That about sums up the "Progressives" as the Dem's front runner likes to call herself. Too bad that for framers of the Constitution INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS meant that every individual should be left alone in his life, liberty, health and possessions. Progressives such as Hillary believe that the government should 'intervene' with the liberties of SOME and forcibly redistribute those goods to others under the pretext that the others have a 'right' to them.

"Progressivism" does not acknowledge any end to government 'intervention' to shape 'individuals' to improve society as they see fit. Thus they neglect the Constitution's promised protection of the individual and economic freedoms from their socialist utopia.

Answer 3

It is a perfect definition of socialism when the definition is covered with powdered sugar and whip cream the way liberals like it, and it's the way Hillary dishes it out.

That quote from Hillary reminds me of what Karl Marx said.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

The left actually believes that there can be utopia on earth and the government can give it to us. So, it is definitely not out of their range to think that "fairness" is a right. That is an unobtainable goal in a world that can't even get rid of terrorism.

Answer 4

Fairness was a main objective of the US Constitution. That is the reason the Founding Fathers made our government a democratic republic – to give small states a fighting chance against larger states. That was also the motivation for the 2nd Amendment – so individual states could defend themselves in case a national military seized political power and turned against the America people. It is the reason that Article VI requires elected officials to swear an oath to the 100% secular US Constitution and not to any religious document or dogma.

----------------------

[e-mail] --

There is not a single mention of God, Jesus, or Christianity anywhere in the US Constitution. They were intentionally excluded.

Even having a Congressional Chaplain is a violation of the ‘establishment’ language of the Constitution – but then, that is only the opinion of the men who wrote and signed the document.

James Madison (Father of the US Constitution) addressed the issue of Congressional Chaplains.

•“Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative."

•"The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives… Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation?”

•“The establishment of the chaplainship to Congs is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority shut the door of worship agst the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain! To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers or that the major sects have a tight to govern the minor.”

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/...

You can replace ‘Catholic’ with ‘Hindu’ or ‘Muslim’ or whatever in the second quotation. They are all the same and equal (and separate from the public sector) in the eyes of the Federal Government.

Here are a couple more Madison quotes, showing that Jefferson was not unique in speaking of a ‘Separation’ between Church and State:

•Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and & Gov't in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history (Detached Memoranda, circa 1820).

•Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together (Letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822).

http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/qmadiso...

By unamimous vote of the 1797 US Congress and signed into law by President John Adams:

• “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,…”

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/barbary/bar1796t.htm

It is, and has always been, Conservatives who have attacked the Constitution and tried to change it – usually to insert their religious dogma where is does not exist and was not – and is not – wanted.

You really don’t know anything about America history, do you?

Answer 5

No one said life was fair. But people inherently want rules of life to be applied across the board the same way, without favor given one way or another.

Answer 6

Fairness in what. Government contracts?? I hope for fairness in that arena and not a boys club handing out deals to their buddies.

Answer 7

Its called forced sharing. The one who uses forces makes other give them their "fair" share

Answer 8

I don't know where it says that either. It seems that 'fairness' has taken the place of achievement. Or 'sharing' has taken the place of opportunity.

Answer 9

To Orange Evil: that's just a flat-out lie, sweetie.

And to the asker: what's wrong with fairness? Oh, right. Certain people in this country have gotten VERY comfortable with the deck being stacked, and it's making them MIGHTY fidgety to think of every citizen standing a fair chance at a good life.

Answer 10

That is not a definition of socialism. Go look the wored up in a textbook on basic political systems.