The Constitutional Myths of the right

Discussion in 'US Constitution' started by IM2, Jan 30, 2019.

  1. ChristopherABrown'
    Offline

    ChristopherABrown' Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    26
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +3
    What an Effort!

    A worthy one too. I see the intent as positive.

    A couple of things however.

    1. The correct definition of the root meaning of the word “idiot” is not published and implications of true meanings not understood.

    2. Written history is heavily censored and revised making the natural law (DNA) aspects as well as origins fairly well unknown, and not effectively denied.

    Needless to say, consideration of the 9th Amendment shows that the people, at any given time can define rights retained but not enumerated.

    How that is done is not taught in schools. Lincoln was trying to use a version of it to stop the civil war, but newspapers would not publish his speeches in big cities.

    Firstly it is only done through formal, lawful majorities in states. Then a supermajority of states at Article V.

    Ummm, anyone ever consider preparation for Article V as a retained right?

    Why would the constitution not retain that right to see people using it to control tyranny, adapt, evolve?
     
  2. vasuderatorrent
    Offline

    vasuderatorrent VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Messages:
    4,160
    Thanks Received:
    217
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +1,060
    The constitution itself tells us how to re-write it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. westwall
    Offline

    westwall Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    60,793
    Thanks Received:
    13,213
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +47,722



    Indeed it does. And it is extremely difficult to do. Intentionally so.
     
  4. ChristopherABrown'
    Offline

    ChristopherABrown' Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    26
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +3
    Well guarded means the people are appraised at each step of the way of what amendments are proposed by delegates and have opportunity to correct any error.
     
  5. EdwardBaiamonte
    Offline

    EdwardBaiamonte Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    32,279
    Thanks Received:
    1,320
    Trophy Points:
    1,100
    Ratings:
    +4,524
    ????? Abortion is not in original Constitution so conservatives oppose using Constitution to justify abortion while Democrats say it is, in effect, in living, changing, even communist Consitution and thus does support abortion or even communism. Now do you understand?
     
  6. Porter Rockwell
    Offline

    Porter Rockwell VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,411
    Thanks Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Ratings:
    +1,156
    So, you do not believe in the implied Right to Life pursuant to the Fifth Amendment?
     
  7. Monk-Eye
    Offline

    Monk-Eye VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2018
    Messages:
    776
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings:
    +160
    " Spinning Wheels "

    * State Interests Versus Personal Religion *
    A state is concerned with , and comprised of , citizens for who the constitution was devised .

    To receive citizenship one must be born and therefore birth is a logical requirement for equal protection that includes a wright to life .

    The premise for equal protection, as being based upon a requirement of birth, was clearly understood and forwarded within the opinion of Blackmun , Roe V. Wade , in the statement , "Logically, of course, a legitimate state interest in this area need not stand or fall on acceptance of the belief that life begins at conception or at some other point prior to live birth." .
     
  8. Porter Rockwell
    Offline

    Porter Rockwell VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,411
    Thanks Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Ratings:
    +1,156
    What is a "wright" to life?
     
  9. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    21,854
    Thanks Received:
    3,023
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +8,430
    Dear EdwardBaiamonte cc: IM2
    1. Many right to life adherents interpret "right to life" (as in the 14th Amendment) as including unborn, while others go by the legally established standard of recognizing personhood starting at birth.

    This is a difference in BELIEF and INTERPRETATION that as long as it is FAITH BASED cannot be "established NOR prohibited" by govt because of the First Amendment.

    Basically you cannot disparage another Constitutional principle by pushing another one "too far" where it starts to violate other rights and protections.

    Sure you can defend your own BELIEF in right to life, but not at the expense of someone else's equal right to believe otherwise. Otherwise, if you violate the First Amendment, you are violating the very Constitutional laws you are claiming to enforce, and the arguments become circular and self-defeating. We do not solve any problems this way, but just complicate them worse!

    2. The OTHER Constitutional right being argued at stake in abortion legislation and enforcement is DUE PROCESS or "substantive due process" as was the issue in Roe V Wade that got abortion laws struck down because the govt couldn't pursue prosecution without the process itself violating the accused's rights BEFORE they were convicted of any wrongdoing.

    This is the other side of Constitutional protections that has to be equally weighed and included:

    NOT punishing or depriving a person of LIBERTY
    BEFORE that person is convicted of a crime or violation.


    So the key to resolving issues of
    abortion laws and rights is similar to conflicts with gun laws and rights:
    DUE PROCESS and not depriving people of liberty without first
    proving they have committed an abuse, crime, violation or threat to others,
    has to be EQUALLY protected or laws get challenged on technicalities,
    similar to abortion laws that attempt to protect rights or beliefs,
    but if they impose complications that violate OTHER Constitutional
    rights and protections, those laws get struck down or thrown out for that reason.

    We are supposed to uphold ALL the laws and rights,
    not compromise or "disparage" one for another and fight politically
    over which is more important. ALL the laws/rights should be respected,
    so we need to write legislation that doesn't compromise one for another!
    ================
    NOTE: after studying this issue and getting feedback from advocates for reform on different sides, I concluded the way to satisfy both prochoice and prolife is to eliminate abortion so that we do not have these arguments. And do it by "prochoice" methods without banning or introducing other legislation/regulations that are contested. Agree on the goal of preventing abortion 100% and then work on steps that achieve that goal which people AGREE to take, one step at a time. Let people fund their own solutions, and only implement through govt what people AGREE on. Keep the rest separate. If the goal is to prevent abortion, then steps can be taken that work effectively, that don't require arguing what to legalize or regulate or not.

    Any legislation would have to be approved by both prolife and prochoice to be fully Constitutional, so good luck with that!
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2019
  10. Monk-Eye
    Offline

    Monk-Eye VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2018
    Messages:
    776
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings:
    +160

Share This Page