[Double Tap]

I have to disagree. The founders of this nation thought enough of INDIVIDUAL, INALIENABLE rights to enumerate them in a Bill of Rights.

Tell me this. Do you believe that the founders of this nation believed in inalienable rights?

[mrsmith]

Of course, they even wrote the Bill of Rights to expressly protect those they agreed upon as important from the new government they created. Just as they had protected them in several states with Bills of Rights. Even in states without Bills of Rights they were protected by tradition and the common law.

There is no historical evidence that the Bill of Rights applied to the states. There is good historical evidence that it applied only to the federal government.

I'm not saying that your's is an unreasonable interpretation- just that it is not the interpretation that was held when the Constitution and Bill of Rights was ratified and put in operation.
As I said, I just don't understand why people want to believe otherwise.
Apparently it is merely the desire to read the most rights into the Constitution. I think the most rights can be had by being faithful to the Constitution as it was understood by the Founders. A living Constitution is too easy to abuse- no matter how well meaning one may be.