Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

IMPORTANT NINTH AMENDMENT
Fiedor Report On the News #326 ^ | 11-21-04 | Doug Fiedor

Posted on 11/20/2004 12:30:13 PM PST by forest

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
Heck, we only need watch the bureaucrats testifying about their wrongdoings for instructions on how to take the Fifth.

The Ninth tells government that all rights belong to us, the people.

"Our Constitution gives you no such authority to require that. Therefore, I take the Ninth, and do not choose to participate in your unconstitutional rule."

The Ninth Amendment says the Constitution does NOT list all our rights.

The United Public Workers and Griswold Scotus cases uphold the Ninth.

The "specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance."

Privacy is not mentioned, but is protected.

1 posted on 11/20/2004 12:30:14 PM PST by forest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: forest
I wouldn't expect a single liberal judge in America to accept the proposition that the Constitution limits the power of Government. Hell, the mass of them, and most liberals in general, would enthusiastically bet their lives that Americans live in a democracy. Most of them wouldn't recognize the Constitution if they stubbed their toe on it.
2 posted on 11/20/2004 12:46:35 PM PST by vetsvette (Bring Him Back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forest
"Nor do I mean to state that the Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of right protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government."

I am not aware of any case where the court ruled that some right, any right, was protected by the ninth. It's usually part of some existing, defined, right.

For example, in the above article, it mentioned the "right" to privacy was built up with pieces from the First, Third, Fourth, and the Fifth Amendments.

3 posted on 11/20/2004 12:49:13 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forest

Just remember, the right to "choose, read: Abortion" can also eminate from the 9th A.


4 posted on 11/20/2004 12:52:12 PM PST by lawdude (Leftists see what they believe. Conservatives believe what they see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forest
Hell, I've had argument's with so called Conservatives right here on Free Republic that the 9th Amd recognizes the Right to Privacy. Some here attempt to proclaim there is no Right to Privacy because it isn't specifically mentioned. The stupid of all political vent just can't comprehend plain spoken English. I'll continue to fall back on it every time the statist here raise their ugly mug! Blackbird.
5 posted on 11/20/2004 1:07:27 PM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lawdude
Just remember, the right to "choose, read: Abortion" can also eminate from the 9th A.

Unfortunately, you're right. I hate it, but you're right. Blackbird.

6 posted on 11/20/2004 1:12:50 PM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: forest

While it's so hard to pick just one, I'd have to say this has always been my favorite amendment.


7 posted on 11/20/2004 1:13:54 PM PST by spinestein (Trade liberty for security. Lose both. Deserve neither.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: BlackbirdSST
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Absolutely brilliant in it's simplicity. Blackbird.

9 posted on 11/20/2004 1:20:39 PM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: forest
From my point of view it would work, but that argument will never work in a court. The judges do not want to hear a constitutional argument in front of them, due to the fact WE would restrict their grip on us!
What can we do? I do not have a civil answer. It may take another UNcivil war to correct this this injustice. [IMHO]
10 posted on 11/20/2004 1:20:55 PM PST by TMSuchman (American by birth,rebel by choice, MARINE BY GOD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irrelevant
Remember when doddering Bob Dole was going around in '96 trying to get support from the conservatives he loathes by quoting the 9th Amendment? In the same speech he'd proclaim that his proudest achievement was the Americans With Disabilities Act!

I remember thinking then, the fallacy in the Act, is it requires taking from others to accomplish, and I as a Citizen have the Right under the same Amd to refuse to participate. I have lost that argument frequently. Something about, this is a Democracy, mob rule and all that. Blackbird shakes his head and spits.

11 posted on 11/20/2004 1:29:22 PM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: forest
"The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be considered to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

I weep for our republic whenever I am reminded how trampled underfoot this simple, plainly-worded English phrase is.

Our country today resembles nothing even remotely approaching it, and we are the poorer for it.

12 posted on 11/20/2004 1:36:01 PM PST by Pahuanui (When a foolish man hears of the Tao, he laughs out loud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forest
Well, well, well, well, well, well, well. Let's not overlook this little key quote which blows away the doctrine of incorporation. The first eight amendments are clearly held by the people and over-ride anything congress or the states passes which are repugnant to and not in pursuance to the supreme law. Check this closely:

"The concurring opinion of Justice Goldberg devoted several pages to the Amendment. Justice Goldberg, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Brennan, said in part:

"The language and history of the Ninth Amendment reveal that the Framers of the Constitution believed that there are additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement, which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight constitutional amendments. ..."

Any questions pertaining to the Second Amendment?

13 posted on 11/20/2004 1:46:49 PM PST by Eastbound ("Neither a Scrooge nor a Patsy be")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST

Abortion legislation is not a proper function of the federal government either pro or con. Except in places explicitly under federal jurisdiction, the criminal law is up to the states. Murder is not an area of competence of the COngress except on federal property.


14 posted on 11/20/2004 2:07:58 PM PST by arthurus (Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: arthurus
Murder is not an area of competence of the Congress except on federal property.

Perhaps not even on Federal property -- but certainly the murder of Federal officers -- as in U.S vs McVeigh.

Remember that it took a State court case to try Nichols for the murder of the "ordinary" citizens (including Federal employees) who were killed in the Murrrah Federal Building (federal property)...

15 posted on 11/20/2004 2:40:56 PM PST by TXnMA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: forest
We have a land use crisis in WA state. I think the 9th Ammendment might be a great defense against state government saying that you have to set aside anywhere from 35 to 65% of your land (depending on location and number of acres) for green space - in other words you can't build on it.

This is on top of the regulations shutting down any construction if some poor critter was seen on your property in the last 5 years or if you have a puddle from the rain around here rendering your plot - "protected wetlands".

16 posted on 11/20/2004 2:50:18 PM PST by HardStarboard (Surrounded by Kerry/Edwards Signs in Washington State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus
Abortion legislation is not a proper function of the federal government either pro or con.

I buy into that, but it's happened none the less. Blackbird.

17 posted on 11/20/2004 2:53:39 PM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: lawdude
"Just remember, the right to "choose, read: Abortion" can also eminate from the 9th A."

In Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court majority used 14th Amendment has the constitutional basis for their decision.

Not the 9th Amendment.

The bottom line of Roe v Wade is that the a fetus is not a person with constitutional rights until it is "viable" to live outside a woman's body.

Up to that point, a fetus is considered nothing more than a cellular mass, which is part of woman's body, similar to her kidney, arm, or leg.

Abortion could be outlawed the day after Congress declares a fetus a human being from conception with all constitutional protections to life and liberty as any other human, citizen.

18 posted on 11/20/2004 3:23:27 PM PST by tahiti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST
"Hell, I've had argument's with so called Conservatives right here on Free Republic that the 9th Amd recognizes the Right to Privacy."

I have to. I am a rabid advocate that we citizens regularily exert our 9th amendment rights.

Let me give you my partial list of such rights:

--I will decide when to wear a seatbelt

--I will decide whether to ingest alchohol while I drive my auto

--I will decide on how much pain killer I will consume to relieve my back pain, arthritis pain, etc. (a la Rush Limbaugh)

--I will decide what chemicals I will ingest, how much I will ingest, and for what reason: medical or recreational

--just as I can love, I can hate.

--I decide who I am going to have a sexual relationship with and whether I will asked to be paid for it.

--as a business owner either a sole proprietor or stockholder, I will decide who I will employ or not employ for any reason I determine: age, race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, overall health, etc. I will also pay employees the amount I wish to pay or offer medical insurance to those I wish to offer it to.

--as a restaurant owner, I will serve only those individuals I wish to serve for my reasons only.

--as a business owner I will decide if, where, and when any one can smoke tobacco in my buildings.

--I will decide what photos of adults clothed or unclothed I will look at

--I will decide whether I educate my children or not.

--I will decide whether I will educate my children in a government school or in my home.

--I will decide if I wish to die.

and so on.

19 posted on 11/20/2004 3:51:59 PM PST by tahiti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tahiti
and so on.

...and so on...infinitum! The 9th was intended to keep the do gooders and the statist among us at bay. Blackbird.

20 posted on 11/20/2004 4:34:28 PM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson