Utah Freedom Conference highlights states' rights issues

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Wolfgang57 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 14, 2012 7:41 p.m.

    First, claiming the land that the Federal government owns will probably fail, and if it succeeds it will cost the states lots of money. Emotional state's righters forget about the logistics.
    Second, if a state did not want to become part of the union and be under the domain of the Federal government, it should have never asked to become a state in the first place. Third, "states rights" has an UGLY history. It was used to defend slavery. It was used to defend Jim Crow laws. And when 30 states told people like me - who has an interracial marriage -that if we got married or had intimate relations we were guilty of a felony, the Federal government had to step in and slam states for their racial intolerance. States justified these laws against interracial marriage by claiming "states rights" to do so. It comes as no surprise that Utsh has such a states rights congregation. After all, they elect officials who want to spit on the poor, minorities, and the victims of the economioc violence of gthe U.S.

  • Ett Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 14, 2012 5:29 p.m.

    I personally hope that Utah prevails on this issue. People make a huge fuss about "lands the Federal government protects." They forget many of the western lands they took were testing sites for nuclear and chemical weapons. Some are abandoned or little used military bases. States like Nevada have more federal than state land. It's time the Feds relinquished some of those holdings.