Sun Devil 92
Diamond Member
- Apr 2, 2015
- 32,078
- 11,104
- 1,410
- Banned
- #21
Are you saying that wasn't the case?
Here is from Hamilton in Federalist 84:
I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What would life be like without the 1st or 2nd (Adams tried to find out anyway) ?
First, I am sure you only posses a Junior High School Civics Class level understanding of President Adams and the Alien and Sedition Acts. more on this later...
now...
"...they were concerned with trying to make a list. They felt that if they missed something...it would be interpreted as not existing and not being able to exist. Hence they only outlined the powers of the Federal Government and restrictions upon it."If the Constitution only listed the powers of the federal government and restrictions on it, it would contain no bill of rights. The fact that the 9th amendment in our Bill of Rights states: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." is an admission on some level that Hamilton was indeed correct (but would even be dangerous.). You appear to be all over the place. In the op and as the OP Dante included the 9th.
-- Hamilton in Federalist 84: "I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous."
and...
There you go again: Are you saying that wasn't the case? -- What wasn't the case? Here is what you replied to: "Some people said no list was needed, Others said rights were self evident."
You make no sense what
It's unfortunate that you ignore the point of the post (which is pretty clear) to focus on a canned response.
So, I'll just point out that you ceded the overall point. Thanks.
Next, we'll deal with Douglas use of the word penumbra.....
You can shove the lecture (with the rest of them) as places like lawbrain make it quite clear that Douglas' use of the term is not in the same context as the others.....something I am familiar with but you (in your haste to become a legend in your own mind) didn't bother to comprehend.
Penumbra - lawbrain.com
....but Justice Douglas took a different approach. Rather than using it to highlight the difficulty of drawing lines or determining the meaning of words or concepts, he used the term when he wanted to refer to a peripheral area or an indistinct boundary of something specific.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In his opinion, Douglas stated that the specific guarantees of the bill of rights have penumbras "formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and sub-stance," and that the right to privacy exists within this area.
Since Griswold, the penumbra doctrine has primarily been used to represent implied powers that emanate from a specific rule, thus extending the meaning of the rule into its periphery or penumbra.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And thus we see that while Douglas didn't coin the term...he certainly is seen as having used it differently....to find what wasn't there before. Which is what I stated.
Those implied powers are what Douglas pulled from his ass.......
Does Dante need to go on ? In this case....no. Nothing Dante could do would make his failure more complete.
A point of your post? "What did the 19th amendment do ? What did Griswold do ? And where are the penumbra's of rights, Douglas called out ?"
Still none too bright? Oh well, there may still be a glimmer of hope fer ya kiddo...
The use of penumbra as a metaphor. Does the previous sentence puzzle you? It should, because regarding usage, that is HOW the word penumbra was used. The context of the word penumbra is USED in the context of a legal decision. Douglas did NOT use the word penumbra in a different context. Ordinarily it would be assumed you would KNOW this. But then again, some of us have a history with your style and actions.
You re-posted something and the inference would be that because you have read it -- you magically are assumed to have comprehended it. The article you re-posted addresses different and changing uses of the metaphor (penumbra), not differing contexts of the metaphor.
What is usually argued and discussed is Douglas' use of the word 'emanations' which give 'life' and 'substance' to the privacy rights. You did not know there was a 'penumbra doctrine' and that would be understandable if you were not posing as more informed and intelligent than you are in reality
You are going to need to find a bigger rock to hide under.
That or some wet wood to help with your smoke screen.
Blah blah blah blah blah.....
Others have used it to point out the struggles of reconciling reality with written law.
Douglas reaches into his ass and find a "principle" that was hiding there...in the shadows.
You blew it when you first brought it up.