Thus, to the opponents who argue that this autonomy allows for states to have their own laws regarding crucial issues such as racism, I would like to bring to their notice that as of now, racism is illegal in all states of the country. I would also explain to the opponents that for any given group of individuals, it takes time to understand and realize certain important things. While other individuals would have already accepted it, certain individuals find it hard to accept change from their already existing philosophies, and this is why there was legalized racism in some states of the US until recently. I would then point to the banning of racism now in all states and tell them how this is no proof that all state governments have realized the evil behind racism, and there is now a growing understanding and respect for every individual as a human.
Furthermore, I would tell them to consider the case of same-sex marriage in the US and how different states have different views regarding it, that is, some states have banned it whereas in other states it is completely legal, which shows each state’s political and cultural autonomy. The opponents will thus understand the need for each state to have its own cultural and political autonomy,
The professor asks if federal government has the right to impose standards on state government, which would upend the local cultural norms of the state. My answer is that in cases like the above mentioned, there should not be an overall decision taken by the central government as to ban or legalize such marriages, as it all basically comes down to the lifestyle choice of the individual. At the same time, there is no harm being inflicted on any person with the same-sex marriage of two individuals. However, in the case of racism, there is both direct and indirect, physical as well as mental pain being inflicted on individuals.
The professor also asks if the