I don't think anyone here will try to argue the fact that the Founding Fathers believed in a limited Government. They went so far as to enumerate exactly 17 powers that the Federal Government was to be limited to and reserved the rest to the People and the States. As a matter of fact, when the Constitution was being formally ratified, 16 of the 55 members of the Constitutional Convention refused to sign because they recognized that the power being granted was too broad and could easily be used to seize more. These people who believed that were call Anti-Federalist. This debate continued well after the adoption of the Constitution and became an important cause of the war between the Northern and Southern States often called the "War Between the States" or the "War of Northern Aggression", depending upon which side you supported at the time.
The South has been accused of entering the War solely to protect the institution of Slavery when this is hardly the case when examined more closely. It had to do more with the economics of the times and resistance to Federal Government trampling of the States ability to rule themselves as the preceding link shows. Four States seceded originally citing protecting Slavery as one of their reasons. Those who followed afterward did so when the Federal Government sought to force the seceding States to remain within the Union. While most people today recognize that Slavery is wrong, back then, this was a minority view. Slaves were legally owned property that the Federal Government was seeking to take away without compensation. Just as recent outrage over abuses of "Imminent Domain" laws to seize private property for commercial development raised outrage across the U.S. recently (and they are being paid fair-market value for this property) so to did this movement to abolish slavery/take property without paying for it raise the ire of the U.S. citizenry. While the history revisionist fail to mention this glaringly obvious fact when writing their government approved textbooks, it was not lost upon those who lived at the time. The abolitionist originally supported compensating the owners, but then changed their minds.
Bottom line, for the South, it was about protecting their livelihood, property, and way of life more than it was about protecting the actual acts of buying and selling of people. The Anti-Federalist and the South, just like the Founding Fathers, feared an intrusive Federal Government meddling in the daily affairs of The People. We have seen their fears come to fruition with such great pieces of legislation as The Defense of Marriage Act, The Patriot Act, Affordable Care Act, etc... While at their heart, many of these Acts seek to modify personal choices, they are exactly what we were warned about by the Anti-Federalist--the invasion of the Federal Government into our private lives. Many seek to defend these intrusions as necessary evils in order to correct a behavior that they personally do not approve of, but they have placed themselves upon a slippery slope whereas the Federal Government may find that something they themselves engage in (pot smoking, gay marriage, religious freedom, etc.) may one day be declared an Enemy of the Federal Governments wishes. Oops, looks like that has already happened (Marijuana Tax Act, Defense of Marriage Act, School Prayer ban) to name a few; and the door is still wide open to even more intrusion.
It is time to rein in the over-reaching Federal Government and return this country to the governance of their own lives. There will be things we don't like which we still must defend from Federal grasp, or we will continue to allow the regulation of our own personal choices in the process. The same Federal Government that was charged with protecting our Rights has become the Enemy and greatest Usurper of those Rights instead. It is inherent of all those who wish to remain Free to safeguard those Freedoms from a tyrannical government. This will cost some of us our freedom temporarily as we are arrested and imprisoned for Civil Disobedience of unjust laws (take the OWS protesters for example), but it is a small price to pay for the continuation of Liberty as the Founding Fathers envisioned it. Even the much maligned Tea Party calls for smaller government has been denigrated in the Media as simply a way to further deprive people of much needed Social Safety nets when this is hardly the case. These safety nets can be administered by State governments which are more likely to align themselves with constituent wishes than a distant and oblivious Federal Government to local needs and resources.
Election 2012 is coming. It is time to remind them of the Oath they swear to uphold the Constitution--not to undermine it!
Mind the CoH when posting. Personal attacks WILL BE DELETED! No name calling including "Teabaggers", "Democrits", "Repuglikans", "Libtards" etc.