[Zman]

Agreed; I have found arguing with the left, who can routinely can turn a catchy phrase but rarely bases reasoning on well-founded logic, to be almost always a waste of time.

As you well know, the meaning of the 9th is still argued over to this day; I have interpreted it to convey to future jurists an attitude of the Founders-era humility: meaning that despite having more foresight than most, by including the 9th they were, in essence, saying “we think we have covered the most fundamental rights in this document, but we may not be all knowing.Therefore, you citizens a few hundred years down the road may discover that we missed something. If you do, and decide that the “new” rights should be codified, then those belong to citizens, not the government. So I read it to encompass unknown (at that time) rights not enumerated.

What do you think?

[wintertime]

Agreed; I have found arguing with the left, who can routinely can turn a catchy phrase but rarely bases reasoning on well-founded logic, to be almost always a waste of time.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It’s like chasing a roach around the kitchen counter.

[Clump]

To an extent I agree, depending I guess on what is meant by new rights.
The main thing to me about the 9th Amendment is that it should keep the government from taking away rights that we have always enjoyed as a free people.
I don't think it is meant to yank the power away from a state to exercise traditional police powers such as protecting the unborn and defining marriage.
Also, I of course agree that the rights listed in the BOR are not exhaustive, but rather a bare minimum. So I think we are in pretty much I'm agreement on this.
I argued these issues at length with other students and professors in law school, and now I don't argue unless I'm paid to for the most part. It's just too tiring, and there are few people willing to argue a point with an open mind.
I now understand why Justice Thomas rarely speaks during oral argument.

[manc]

Same here.
I have found that they love to spout their bumper sticker slogans but when they are questioned they demonstrate their ignorance on such issues and have no facts what so ever.
In the end they either spout names or just say they don’t want to talk about it.

Either way , if the ignorant and dumb were not allowed to vote unless they knew what they were voting for then the Dem party and Bozo the clown would have no got voted in.