Can a Constitution Destroy Our Rights?

[ihopehefails]

The constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms but how is this possible when most constitutions that are written state the functions of government such as deciding term limits for public officials, what is considered a majority, under what circumstances can money be spent, and other mundane boring things that have nothing to do with the personal lives of individual citizens.

Further, it is possible to write into any constitution something that would remove someone's rights just as it can have things that protect someone's rights (like the first amendment). This means a constitution can do great harm or do great good and makes the concept of a constitution neither a force for human rights or a force for tyranny but a lifeless legal document that states the rules that a government functions by.

Since a constitution is nothing more than a glorified charter for the government it must suggest that our rights do not come from a constitution since any action, including ones that might violate our rights, it can legally take would still be constitutionally legal for that government.

This means that a constitution does not embody our rights since free and unregulated people create constitutions that establishes a government so it is impossible for any constitution to grant any additional freedoms that the same people did not have before they created it.

 

[dilloduck]

I think you're on to something here

 

[Old Rocks]

Oh my, another Neo-con that believes the Constitution is "just a goddamned peice of paper".

 

[Cecilie1200]

The constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms but how is this possible when most constitutions that are written state the functions of government such as deciding term limits for public officials, what is considered a majority, under what circumstances can money be spent, and other mundane boring things that have nothing to do with the personal lives of individual citizens.

Further, it is possible to write into any constitution something that would remove someone's rights just as it can have things that protect someone's rights (like the first amendment). This means a constitution can do great harm or do great good and makes the concept of a constitution neither a force for human rights or a force for tyranny but a lifeless legal document that states the rules that a government functions by.

Since a constitution is nothing more than a glorified charter for the government it must suggest that our rights do not come from a constitution since any action, including ones that might violate our rights, it can legally take would still be constitutionally legal for that government.

This means that a constitution does not embody our rights since free and unregulated people create constitutions that establishes a government so it is impossible for any constitution to grant any additional freedoms that the same people did not have before they created it.

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

 

[ihopehefails]

The constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms but how is this possible when most constitutions that are written state the functions of government such as deciding term limits for public officials, what is considered a majority, under what circumstances can money be spent, and other mundane boring things that have nothing to do with the personal lives of individual citizens.

Further, it is possible to write into any constitution something that would remove someone's rights just as it can have things that protect someone's rights (like the first amendment). This means a constitution can do great harm or do great good and makes the concept of a constitution neither a force for human rights or a force for tyranny but a lifeless legal document that states the rules that a government functions by.

Since a constitution is nothing more than a glorified charter for the government it must suggest that our rights do not come from a constitution since any action, including ones that might violate our rights, it can legally take would still be constitutionally legal for that government.

This means that a constitution does not embody our rights since free and unregulated people create constitutions that establishes a government so it is impossible for any constitution to grant any additional freedoms that the same people did not have before they created it.

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

This is the only thing government does really well because that is what governments are created for.

 

[jillian]

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

actually it restains governments interference in our INDIVIDUAL liberties...

you know, that whole waterboarding torture thingy...

and attempts to interfere with a woman's control over her own body...

or consenting adults marrying whom they choose.

so yeah, the government's been remiss ...

but don't worry... it's getting better.

oh...and there ISN'T any such thing as "rights" except as political philosophy... except for what the government you HATE will enforce.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms but how is this possible when most constitutions that are written state the functions of government such as deciding term limits for public officials, what is considered a majority, under what circumstances can money be spent, and other mundane boring things that have nothing to do with the personal lives of individual citizens.

Further, it is possible to write into any constitution something that would remove someone's rights just as it can have things that protect someone's rights (like the first amendment). This means a constitution can do great harm or do great good and makes the concept of a constitution neither a force for human rights or a force for tyranny but a lifeless legal document that states the rules that a government functions by.

Since a constitution is nothing more than a glorified charter for the government it must suggest that our rights do not come from a constitution since any action, including ones that might violate our rights, it can legally take would still be constitutionally legal for that government.

This means that a constitution does not embody our rights since free and unregulated people create constitutions that establishes a government so it is impossible for any constitution to grant any additional freedoms that the same people did not have before they created it.

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

This is the only thing government does really well because that is what governments are created for.

Untrue. Governments exist to serve as the active arm of the community as a whole. They are created to allow society to do those things it must do collectively, like providing for public safety and infrastructure. Because the community which creates the government necessarily invests it with a certain amount of power, they can also be used to oppress people, but that is not their original or only purpose.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

actually it restains governments interference in our INDIVIDUAL liberties...

ACTUALLY, I just said that, but thank you so much for brilliantly repeating and reiterating my words for us all.

you know, that whole waterboarding torture thingy...

No, I don't know, nor am I interested in listening to you trying to shoehorn your partisan bullshit into this.

and attempts to interfere with a woman's control over her own body...

See above.

or consenting adults marrying whom they choose.

It always amuses me how dimwits like you can drag the government and society kicking and screaming into your private lives, and then disingenuously lecture everyone on "How dare you interfere?" I am even less interested in your ignorance-fueled hypocrisy than I am in your partisan hackery.

so yeah, the government's been remiss ...

but don't worry... it's getting better.

I can only assume "better" means "we're getting government to interfere in the rights WE want interfered with, because you people are too stupid to use them the way we think you should", since that's the position you and your tweeko compatriots always default to.

oh...and there ISN'T any such thing as "rights" except as political philosophy... except for what the government you HATE will enforce.

Exactly the sort of nonsensical, meaningless remark I've come to expect from the vast vacuum between your ears.

 

[ihopehefails]

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

actually it restains governments interference in our INDIVIDUAL liberties...

you know, that whole waterboarding torture thingy...

and attempts to interfere with a woman's control over her own body...

or consenting adults marrying whom they choose.

so yeah, the government's been remiss ...

but don't worry... it's getting better.

oh...and there ISN'T any such thing as "rights" except as political philosophy... except for what the government you HATE will enforce.

All those are really nice but you have to find something where the constitution actually forbids the government from doing anything. That was the point of what I was trying to say that a constitution exist to define government power and it is possible to write an amendment banning your preciuous gay marriage and still be constitutional just like I think income tax is a communist tax but it is still legal for the government to tax us that way.

It is all constitutional no matter how unfair we think it is.

 

[ihopehefails]

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

This is the only thing government does really well because that is what governments are created for.

Untrue. Governments exist to serve as the active arm of the community as a whole. They are created to allow society to do those things it must do collectively, like providing for public safety and infrastructure. Because the community which creates the government necessarily invests it with a certain amount of power, they can also be used to oppress people, but that is not their original or only purpose.

A church can do the same thing and serve the active community (of christians) as a whole.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

actually it restains governments interference in our INDIVIDUAL liberties...

you know, that whole waterboarding torture thingy...

and attempts to interfere with a woman's control over her own body...

or consenting adults marrying whom they choose.

so yeah, the government's been remiss ...

but don't worry... it's getting better.

oh...and there ISN'T any such thing as "rights" except as political philosophy... except for what the government you HATE will enforce.

All those are really nice but you have to find something where the constitution actually forbids the government from doing anything. That was the point of what I was trying to say that a constitution exist to define government power and it is possible to write an amendment banning your preciuous gay marriage and still be constitutional just like I think income tax is a communist tax but it is still legal for the government to tax us that way.

It is all constitutional no matter how unfair we think it is.

Well, that would be because "fair" is a wholly subjective, kindergarten concept that has little to do with adult reality.

 

[ihopehefails]

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

actually it restains governments interference in our INDIVIDUAL liberties...

you know, that whole waterboarding torture thingy...

and attempts to interfere with a woman's control over her own body...

or consenting adults marrying whom they choose.

so yeah, the government's been remiss ...

but don't worry... it's getting better.

oh...and there ISN'T any such thing as "rights" except as political philosophy... except for what the government you HATE will enforce.

That is a very strange theory because without government (assuming that is possible) a person is pretty much free do to anything without any restraint whatsoever so I wonder how does the freedom of anyone depend on the existence of government?

 

[ihopehefails]

actually it restains governments interference in our INDIVIDUAL liberties...

you know, that whole waterboarding torture thingy...

and attempts to interfere with a woman's control over her own body...

or consenting adults marrying whom they choose.

so yeah, the government's been remiss ...

but don't worry... it's getting better.

oh...and there ISN'T any such thing as "rights" except as political philosophy... except for what the government you HATE will enforce.

All those are really nice but you have to find something where the constitution actually forbids the government from doing anything. That was the point of what I was trying to say that a constitution exist to define government power and it is possible to write an amendment banning your preciuous gay marriage and still be constitutional just like I think income tax is a communist tax but it is still legal for the government to tax us that way.

It is all constitutional no matter how unfair we think it is.

Well, that would be because "fair" is a wholly subjective, kindergarten concept that has little to do with adult reality.

It is all constitutional no matter how much we disagree with it and think that the implementation of that power makes our life more difficult.

Is that better?

 

[jillian]

All those are really nice but you have to find something where the constitution actually forbids the government from doing anything. That was the point of what I was trying to say that a constitution exist to define government power and it is possible to write an amendment banning your preciuous gay marriage and still be constitutional just like I think income tax is a communist tax but it is still legal for the government to tax us that way.

It is all constitutional no matter how unfair we think it is.

Really nice?

all constitutional?

no... it's not. The Constitution specifically avoids limiting itself because it was intended to adapt and be applied to different circumstances. It is NOT some fundie's bible....

If people who scream about the constitution actually learned something about constitutional construction and people like you really DID care about it's application, we'd all be better off.

as for *my* "precious gay marriage"... I believe even you should have the right to marry the person of your choice...even if the fact that you will be passing on double digit IQ's will create huge societal issues.

Unfortunately, every whiner who has ever read a blog thinks they know what the Constitution "means".

Try staying out of other people's bodies... and religious beliefs...

oh.... and if there is a constitutional amendment, it BY DEFINITION is constitutional... you do get that don't you?

 

[ihopehefails]

All those are really nice but you have to find something where the constitution actually forbids the government from doing anything. That was the point of what I was trying to say that a constitution exist to define government power and it is possible to write an amendment banning your preciuous gay marriage and still be constitutional just like I think income tax is a communist tax but it is still legal for the government to tax us that way.

It is all constitutional no matter how unfair we think it is.

Really nice?

all constitutional?

no... it's not. The Constitution specifically avoids limiting itself because it was intended to adapt and be applied to different circumstances. It is NOT some fundie's bible....

If people who scream about the constitution actually learned something about constitutional construction and people like you really DID care about it's application, we'd all be better off.

as for *my* "precious gay marriage"... I believe even you should have the right to marry the person of your choice...even if the fact that you will be passing on double digit IQ's will create huge societal issues.

Unfortunately, every whiner who has ever read a blog thinks they know what the Constitution "means".

Try staying out of other people's bodies... and religious beliefs...

oh.... and if there is a constitutional amendment, it BY DEFINITION is constitutional... you do get that don't you?

I don't think that I said it was fundie's bible in fact the constitution specifically states you can't create a state church nor interfere with private creation of one. It does not prevent the creation of laws that happen to be based on someone's religious teachings. It only prevents the state from establishing a religion of its own which would have a competitive advantage with any other religion in existence. So get off this kick that people are jamming christian laws down your throat because it is constitutional to do so and if it wasn't then "thou shall not steal" and "thou shall not kill" are going to have to be taken off the books.

I actually think that a person's own religious belief or any moral belief that says that a person exists since conception is sufficient grounds to ban abortions legally. In that case, that freedom should be taken away from you since you are harming another person just like the freedom to murder and steel is taken away from you. You may not agree but if it is constitutionally legal for the government to do then how can you say that the government can't do that?

 

[Citizen]

Since a government can deny us the recognition of our rights and freedoms, our Constitution is said to be the instrument of our freedoms by setting careful boundaries for our government to prevent it from denying the recognition of our rights.

Granted, our government pays very little attention to our Constitution, but . . .

actually it restains governments interference in our INDIVIDUAL liberties...

you know, that whole waterboarding torture thingy...

and attempts to interfere with a woman's control over her own body...

or consenting adults marrying whom they choose.

so yeah, the government's been remiss ...

but don't worry... it's getting better.

oh...and there ISN'T any such thing as "rights" except as political philosophy... except for what the government you HATE will enforce.

That is a very strange theory because without government (assuming that is possible) a person is pretty much free do to anything without any restraint whatsoever so I wonder how does the freedom of anyone depend on the existence of government?

Maybe we should let our Declaration of Independence give us some of the answers.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is the only thing government does really well because that is what governments are created for.

Untrue. Governments exist to serve as the active arm of the community as a whole. They are created to allow society to do those things it must do collectively, like providing for public safety and infrastructure. Because the community which creates the government necessarily invests it with a certain amount of power, they can also be used to oppress people, but that is not their original or only purpose.

A church can do the same thing and serve the active community (of christians) as a whole.

No, a church cannot do the same things a government can unless you invest it with the same official power that a government has, at which point it becomes a government, rather than just a church. Churches have their own purpose, and it doesn't include providing police/military, building roads, etc.

 

[Cecilie1200]

All those are really nice but you have to find something where the constitution actually forbids the government from doing anything. That was the point of what I was trying to say that a constitution exist to define government power and it is possible to write an amendment banning your preciuous gay marriage and still be constitutional just like I think income tax is a communist tax but it is still legal for the government to tax us that way.

It is all constitutional no matter how unfair we think it is.

Well, that would be because "fair" is a wholly subjective, kindergarten concept that has little to do with adult reality.

It is all constitutional no matter how much we disagree with it and think that the implementation of that power makes our life more difficult.

Is that better?

As far as it goes.

I'd say the more power the government has, the more it will make EVERYONE'S life difficult, particularly if that power is in areas that the government really isn't suited for. In many cases, people try to make the federal government micromanage the details of people's lives, and it becomes akin to playing the piano while wearing boxing gloves, or swatting flies with a sledgehammer.

It's always amazed me that the same people who advocate conducting military operations with "just enough force" never want to apply that theory to anything else they want the government to do.

 

[ihopehefails]

Well, that would be because "fair" is a wholly subjective, kindergarten concept that has little to do with adult reality.

It is all constitutional no matter how much we disagree with it and think that the implementation of that power makes our life more difficult.

Is that better?

As far as it goes.

I'd say the more power the government has, the more it will make EVERYONE'S life difficult, particularly if that power is in areas that the government really isn't suited for. In many cases, people try to make the federal government micromanage the details of people's lives, and it becomes akin to playing the piano while wearing boxing gloves, or swatting flies with a sledgehammer.

It's always amazed me that the same people who advocate conducting military operations with "just enough force" never want to apply that theory to anything else they want the government to do.

I agree with you but the point I was trying to make is that the constitution just constitutes the powers of the government and as long as it stays within those confines, no matter what it does for good or for evil, it will always be constitutional to do those things.

I think sometimes people on the left believe that the constitution is some kind of ethereal document that they protects their causes such as allowing abortion yet it may not protect anyone's notion of what their rights are simply because its possible to create a constitution that violates what you think are your rights.

 

[ihopehefails]

actually it restains governments interference in our INDIVIDUAL liberties...

you know, that whole waterboarding torture thingy...

and attempts to interfere with a woman's control over her own body...

or consenting adults marrying whom they choose.

so yeah, the government's been remiss ...

but don't worry... it's getting better.

oh...and there ISN'T any such thing as "rights" except as political philosophy... except for what the government you HATE will enforce.

That is a very strange theory because without government (assuming that is possible) a person is pretty much free do to anything without any restraint whatsoever so I wonder how does the freedom of anyone depend on the existence of government?

Maybe we should let our Declaration of Independence give us some of the answers.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

If you read the first part it says that our rights are endowed by our creator and the part you highlighted simply says that government's exist to secure the already existing rights that were given to us by our creator.