An open question...
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
W
WinterBorn
Guest
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Its self-evident.
Is that it?? If life is an inalenable right how do we do death penality?
W
WinterBorn
Guest
The rights are subject to rules by society. At least that is the rationale.
Personally, I disagree with capital punishment.
Is that it? Those cover most of what you would call unalienable rights.
Because if its inalenable rights you cant be seperated from those rights, so to me its not really life... Its your right to due process... menaing the state cant take those rights from you without going through certian procedures AKA a trial.
My point is that Conservatives, Republicans and now possably even the Obama administration are openly discussing doing just that with the underware bomber.
My point is that Conservatives, Republicans and now possably even the Obama administration are openly discussing doing just that with the underware bomber.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
At least in this thread you seem to be more balanced.
And the trial can manifest itself in a civilian jury trial or a military tribunal...either way, he will receive 'due process'....
and please get that spell checker, you're driving me nuts...
I dare say I have studied it more than most.
"Individual Rights" and "limits on government" are very often the same thing. So how can we allow the government to grow beyond those limits and deny the underwear bomber his due process? Cheney, while now against it, was a part of an administration that did it correctly in the case of the shoe bomber.
Individuals have a Constitutional right to a trial by JURY, how do you propose taking that away?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
In reality, the Federal government has no limits since they have ignored the Constitution since FDR, and the Supreme Court has let them.
Okay, but what should be the rights, and why should the underware bomber not enjoy them?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
First of all, it is spelled "underwear", as you wear it under something else.
Since the US stated that it is at war with terrorism, those committing acts of war should be tried by a military tribunal.
So those who are in poverty should be tried by a military tribunal? The U.S. has stated we are at war with poverty!
SmarterthanYou
rebel
5th Amendment. have you read it?
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
do you understand the bolded part?
Yes, read my second post!
It is therefire not an inalienable right but one that is alienable as long as due process is used! Do you not understand that?
Thus the inalienable right is to DUE PROCESS, not life.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
semantics. rights are inalienable. period. I can prove it.
Prove to me that we have an inalenable right to Life or liberty...!
OK ....common sense tells me to ignore you but I gotta ask....WHO wants to deny the underwear bomber his due process?
and trying to understand what your point is about Cheney...you realize that at the time of the shoe bomber issue, military tribunals were't considered as an alternative to civilian jury trial....
and the rest of your posts seem to be your attempt to play with words rather then debate an issue...
SmarterthanYou
rebel
if you try to take my life or liberty, i'll kill you. my right is inalienable.