Skip to comments.
New Frontier in Random Drug Testing: Checking High Schoolers for Tobacco
Associated Press ^
| Oct. 7, 2002
| Greg Giuffrida
Posted on 10/08/2002 4:35:09 AM PDT by Wolfie
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 201-209 next last
To: Roscoe
Your bluff No bluff; your criterion for deciding constitutionality is invalid, as even you realize when the subject is Roe v Wade.
141
posted on
10/08/2002 1:39:25 PM PDT
by
MrLeRoy
To: freeeee
Minors have all rights we have. They are too young to exercise them so they are held in proxy and exercised by their parents. Their parents vote for them? Must be Democrats.
142
posted on
10/08/2002 1:39:45 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
Find even one authority or court decision Your criterion for deciding constitutionality is invalid, as even you realize when the subject is Roe v Wade.
143
posted on
10/08/2002 1:40:39 PM PDT
by
MrLeRoy
To: tpaine
The ninth is in plain english. ALL rights are retained by the people, enumerated or not. That isn't what it says.
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Find a single authority or court decision that holds that illicit drug use is an unemumerated right under the Ninth Amendment.
Just one.
144
posted on
10/08/2002 1:44:52 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
Their parents vote for them? Must be Democrats. 1. The vote is recieved when the child becomes the age of majority and holds capacity. This is directly addressed in the 26th Amendment.
2. Parents are presumed to vote in their child's best interests.
None of this means that rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights do not apply to minors, when exercised through their parents.
145
posted on
10/08/2002 1:46:00 PM PDT
by
freeeee
To: freeeee
Thas why I say they CAN enter into contracts legally. It is possible. But a parent can't approve of a vice for their child. They would forfiet the children.
To: Roscoe
You're starting your silly nitpicking, repetitive behaviors again.
-- Keep up the good work.
147
posted on
10/08/2002 1:48:35 PM PDT
by
tpaine
To: Roscoe
Find a single authority or court decision Your criterion for deciding constitutionality is invalid, as even you realize when the subject is Roe v Wade.
148
posted on
10/08/2002 1:48:44 PM PDT
by
MrLeRoy
To: A CA Guy
But a parent can't approve of a vice for their child. They would forfiet the children. Agreed. But they can assert 4th Amendment rights for the child. A public school can ask a parent to search a child. The parent can consent to the search or reject the request, regardless of what the child wants.
If the parent asserts the child's 4th Amendment rights, the school, being a government agency is bound by the 4th Amendment's requirement for probable cause and a warrant.
149
posted on
10/08/2002 1:52:29 PM PDT
by
freeeee
To: MrLeRoy
Really? Rehnquist wrote a superb dissent.
150
posted on
10/08/2002 1:52:45 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: TheOtherOne
Another day, another couple Freedoms gone. If you choose to put your children in socialist, state-run institutions, you must accept the consequences that has to their freedoms and yours.
151
posted on
10/08/2002 1:53:48 PM PDT
by
Spiff
To: freeeee
1. The vote is recieved when the child becomes the age of majority and holds capacity. This is directly addressed in the 26th Amendment. Non sequitur.
152
posted on
10/08/2002 1:54:03 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
Rehnquist wrote a superb dissent. Ah, so dissenting opinions count as "authority"? Works for me. By the same token, majority opinions that were later overturned would have to count as "authority." Let's see what we can find ....
153
posted on
10/08/2002 1:56:27 PM PDT
by
MrLeRoy
To: MrLeRoy
"Your criterion for deciding constitutionality is invalid, as even you realize when the subject is Roe v Wade." - MrLR
_________________________________
Exactly. - Notice how roscoe could not counter my reasoning here:
Posted by tpaine to Roscoe
On News/Activism Oct 8 12:55 PM #126 of 148
"Roe v. Wade invented a "Constitional right" to commit abortions out of thin air." - roscoe
Not at all. R-v-W, in effect, told states to obey the 14th amendment in the writing of abortion law.
Outright prohibition of abortion was declared unconstitutional for a number of specified reasons. - Read it.
154
posted on
10/08/2002 1:56:48 PM PDT
by
tpaine
To: SheLion
Bump!
To: Roscoe
Non sequitur. You brought up the topic of the vote, and the conversation involves constitutional rights of minors.
156
posted on
10/08/2002 1:58:37 PM PDT
by
freeeee
To: freeeee
You brought up the topic of the vote Right. Kids don't have a right to vote.
157
posted on
10/08/2002 2:00:05 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: MrLeRoy
Ah, so dissenting opinions count as "authority"? The Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court isn't an authority?
Let's see what we can find ....
Please do. It would be novel to see you bring something to the table.
158
posted on
10/08/2002 2:02:57 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
Kids don't have a right to vote. As directly addressed by an amendment.
Now, to get back on topic, find me the one that says that they have to be 18 to assert 4th Amendment rights (or anything else in the Bill of Rights) through their legal proxies.
159
posted on
10/08/2002 2:06:47 PM PDT
by
freeeee
To: freeeee
As directly addressed by an amendment. Even before the "amendment."
160
posted on
10/08/2002 2:10:10 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 201-209 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson