Posted on 12/15/2004 10:34:15 AM PST by RayStacy
I am sure it is a disaster to those who oppose the rights stated so plainly. It is certainly a disaster to the courts who try to interpret those rights because there really is no interpretation needed.
That's not how I read it. This guy LOVES those rights just like you and I do, but he is saying that we now have ONLY those rights, and that the enumeration has been lost because of the BOR.
As they say, winning an election isn't everything, it's the ONLY thing.
It's not like they didn't recognize the problem.
I believe the Constitutions of each State can be found at Avalon.com.
Please note also, that many of the ideas of our founders evolved as they went through the process and one has to be careful in expounding on just one statement within that process of compromise.
There are still ramifications for intended or unintended consequences of speech. Like a gun, it is legal to own but if you shoot someone you pay.
No we don't. Every amendment of the BoR save the 3rd has been ignored. The only reason the 3rd is still around is because government doesn't want troops in your house. And if they wanted that they'd get it just as fast as SCOTUS could say "compelling state interest".
A bill of rights annexed to a constitution, is an enumeration of the powers reserved. If we attempt an enumeration, every thing that is not enumerated, is presumed to be given.
Apparently the author didn't read through the end of the BoR.
Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
I disagree that the BoR has been a failure. Government was going to disregard the concepts of enumeration and federalism anyway. The BoR served to slow down the inevitible assault on some of the more important rights. Think of how many court cases have sprung from it. Without the BoR, we wouldn't even have those.
Correct.
The cons was voted on, ratified, and was law of the land WITHOUT a BOR. The BOR came a year later.
Let's put the 2nd Amendment FIRST!!!!
They DEFINITELY did recognize the problem. It's just a damn shame that outside of this website, only 4 people on the globe know of the 9th and 10th amends, and/or the enumeration.
I can see how democracy is destroying the Constitution, but not the Bill of Rights.
Perhaps only those allowed under federal law. State laws are a different matter. Just like a warranty.
In those days a solemn promise was a solemn promise ~ you shouldn't use today's standards to judge the founders.
Ahh, but imagine a world without a BOR. Without a BOR, EVERYBODY, liberal, consevative, fat, thin, etc., would be more or less forced to know of the enumeration or else they would be forced to believe we have NO rites at all. Without a BOR we would still have had 10,000 court cases dealing with "Where are our rites? How are they protected? What may the G. NOT do to me?" Maybe, (I certainly don't know) but maybe, the people would have been forced to know of the enumeration, and we'd have all the rites in the BOR, plus a million others.
Well, the enumeration WAS the most important part of the CONS. Destroy the enumeration, destroy the cons.
Most people (especially Conservatives, [who ought to know better!]), seem to think that the Bill Of Rights gives them rights.
Example people claim: "The Second Amendment gives me the right to carry my gun into...."
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.