Why was a declaration of rights needed?

[rupol2000]

Commit a felony and see what rights you lose. Rights are conditional. You can surrender your rights.

This is irrelevant. Children also do not have full rights

 

[ding]

This is irrelevant. Children also do not have full rights

If it's irrelevant then why did you ask the question in the first place.

 

[rupol2000]

If it's irrelevant then why did you ask the question in the first place.

Assuming that the declaration of rights refers only to the government, then one could assume that the 14th amendment covers implicit rights. But it's not.

 

[rupol2000]

Once again, if the 14th amendment covers implicit rights, then it is impossible to issue new laws, because any law that is passed restricts implicit rights.

 

[ReinyDays]

Commit a felony and see what rights you lose. Rights are conditional. You can surrender your rights.

Rights are not absolute ... there's serious efforts here to throw a former President into prison for his speech ... even though the speech was political in nature ... did his speech at The Oval "imminately" cause the "lawless actions" at the Capitol? ...

It's laughable joke to think anyone would even suggest in public that Putin be arrested and throw in jail ... laughable ...

 

[rupol2000]

Rights are not absolute

Explicit rights are absolute, implicit rights can be limited at any time by the issuance of law. Therefore, the decision of the Supreme Court is out of law.

 

[ReinyDays]

Once again, if the 14th amendment covers implicit rights, then it is impossible to issue new laws, because any law that is passed restricts implicit rights.

That explains why your country keeps the dictatorship form of government ... your people can't govern themselves ... not with a profound lack of education ... no public schools keeps the peasants knuckled under ... serfdom is alive and well in your country ...

 

[rupol2000]

your country

This is a common practice in any country.

And America now cannot separate itself from dictatorships, as it did during the Reagan era. Freedom in the US is also disappearing

 

[ReinyDays]

Explicit rights are absolute, implicit rights can be limited at any time by the issuance of law. Therefore, the decision of the Supreme Court is out of law.

The right to own slaves has been rescinded, stupid, are your reading skill enough to understand the 13th Amendment? ...

Hey stupid ... why would a case come to be if there wasn't an issue under the law? ...

How much experience do you have with American courts? ... I'm guessing none at all ... because you're really coming across as a complete idiot along the lines of PoliticalChic ... are you pretending to be a woman as well? ...

 

[ReinyDays]

This is a common practice in any country.

And America now cannot separate itself from dictatorships, as it did during the Reagan era. Freedom in the US is also disappearing

Are you speaking of the President's veto power? ... that can be overturned by Congress ... or are you speaking of SCOTUS' seemingly absolute power? ... that can be overturned by We the People ... "Only half a year later, the court's holding that the federal government could not mandate suffrage for 18-to-21-year-olds to vote in state and local elections was effectively rendered moot by the enactment of the Twenty-sixth Amendment." {Wiki "Cite"} ...

6 months ... 182-1/2 days ... that's all the time it takes to gather 2/3's of each house of Congress and 3/4's the States to overturn the SCOTUS ... that's literally impossible in any other country ...

Freedom in the US is also disappearing

This is true ... on balance ... and it saddens me ... we used to be able to drink beer on the nude beach in San Diego ... fucking city put signs up saying swimsuits were optional ... the bastards ... now where are the 14-year-old little girls going to go to prance around in their birthday suits in front of middle-aged men? ... they're not allowed in strip clubs ... murders every hour inland, but the cowards at SDPD are down on the beaches enforcing the no drinking ordinances ...

However ... we've magnitudes of rights more than anywhere else in the world .. bar none ...

=====

You disdain the historical and religious roots of our legal system here in The West ... so you do understand, you're just trolling ... poorly at that ... who's you Pope baby? ...

 

[ding]

Assuming that the declaration of rights refers only to the government, then one could assume that the 14th amendment covers implicit rights. But it's not.

That was even more than less than helpful.

 

[ding]

Rights are not absolute ... there's serious efforts here to throw a former President into prison for his speech ... even though the speech was political in nature ... did his speech at The Oval "imminately" cause the "lawless actions" at the Capitol? ...

It's laughable joke to think anyone would even suggest in public that Putin be arrested and throw in jail ... laughable ...

It was a little more than a speech.

 

[ReinyDays]

It was a little more than a speech.

Well ... the rioting at the Capitol wasn't "imminate" to the President's speech ... thus it's protected ... the folks who heard the call to break down the barricades didn't have time to go and break down the barricades before the barricades were broken down ... the case fails on simple cause-and-effect ...

Once the synagogue is burnt down, the drunken Nazis can cry to burn it down all they want to ... protected speech ...

 

[ding]

Well ... the rioting at the Capitol wasn't "imminate" to the President's speech ... thus it's protected ... the folks who heard the call to break down the barricades didn't have time to go and break down the barricades before the barricades were broken down ... the case fails on simple cause-and-effect ...

Once the synagogue is burnt down, the drunken Nazis can cry to burn it down all they want to ... protected speech ...

Did you even watch the hearings? Dude pulled every string he could to circumvent the constitutionally required peaceful transfer of power.