In a recent edition of The Citizen, Mr. Timothy Parker took objection to my response to his earlier letter to the editor. I find it necessary to again respond.
In his most recent letter, Mr. Parker accuses me of inventing an issue and of misrepresenting history. After carefully reviewing his original letter, my response, and his rebuttal, I have absolutely no idea how he concluded that I invented an issue. I simply responded to his earlier letter, point by point.
Regarding his accusation of misrepresenting history, his lengthy timeline does not change the fundamental fact that the issue of a Bill of Rights was essential to implementing the Constitution.
Like Dr. Hendrickson, I quoted the Declaration of Independence, the founding document of our nation. However, Mr. Parker displays his apparent contempt by stating, “The only thing the Declaration of Independence has in common with the Constitution is Roger Sherman’s signature.”
I believe it is impossible to understand what the founders were trying to accomplish (in framing the Constitution) without recognizing the ideas enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.
Mr. Parker states his belief that the government is not violating our rights because the Supreme Court has blessed the social programs to which Dr. Hendrickson raised objection, ignoring the right of any citizen to challenge the legitimacy of actions by our government when there is no constitutional basis for such government action.
Lest we forget, the Supreme Court has been wrong in the past (Plessy v. Ferguson is one blatant example).
Mr. Parker also states, “For the same reason the convention didn’t feel the need to write in people’s rights, they didn’t feel a need to write in all that the government could possibly do.”
However, the Tenth Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Plainly stated, this means the federal government is only allowed to do that which the Constitution authorizes. It seems Mr. Parker would agree with Congressman Pete Stark (D-CA), who said in a town hall meeting last summer, “The federal government, yes, can do most anything in this country.”
Mr. Parker goes on to imply that I do not accept the supremacy of the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, choosing to lump me in with Texas Governor Rick Perry and Fox News, neither of which I cited.
I do accept the concept of nullification, but only when the federal government is exercising its legitimate role. I simply want the federal government to attend to its constitutionally-defined duties and butt out everywhere else.
Mike Taylor
Peachtree City, Ga.
