Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Robin
Having a written constitution is an interesting thing - especially the Bill of Rights. In the UK there are all the laws telling you what you may *not* do and none at all telling you what you *may*. Theoretically this means that in the UK if it's not against the law it's legal. But in practise it means if someone doesn't like what you do they can find a way to make it illegal.
On the other hand, in the US it seems that allowing local decency rules etc to override the constitution removes those rights wherever a local community sees fit.
So I'm of two minds which system offers the more freedoms (if either - because the state always wins in the end  ) |
Robin...a long time ago, a British acquaintance was complaining about his future job opportunities, because he was "so old." I goggled, as we have laws protecting people from age discrimination. I goggled again because the man was only 40 years old. I couldn't believe that companies in Britain could discriminate on the basis of age...or that the age in question could be such a youthful one.
State laws can not, in fact, override federal ones, as a lot of "States Rights" advocates have repeatedly discovered.
The referendum for the use of medical marijuana passed easily in California. Implementing it has been difficult.