I consider myself a Constitutionalist. Most Republicans would not consider me a Constitutionalist.
more of the 4th Amendment taken away
- Thread starter SmarterthanYou
- Start date
I consider myself a Constitutionalist. Most Republicans would not consider me a Constitutionalist.
You left out Conservatives who don't support the right to Privacy from excessive government intrusion into life decisions.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
all due respect, but I do not consider you a constitutionalist either, simply based upon your ideology concerning the 2nd Amendment.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
wasn't that what I said a few posts above that one?
Obama supports the Patriot Act and Gitmo and has expanded it well over and above its original intent, Gitmo still houses enemy combatants....
...and non-citizens in the US are protected by the our Constitution....so what is it you're saying.
I know, I understand your position. I am not your brand of Constitutionalist. I am not an absolutist.
Or did you mean to leave that out ?
he's saying that those who originally supported those things, the Conservatives are not true Constitutionalists.
Decisions about death are included in "life decisions".
So if you don't agree with an Amendment you just re-invent what it means and has meant for 200 years to suit you needs ?
The Constitution does mention some 'absolutes' doesn't it ? Unambiguous ones...
Yes....they sure are....and an important matter to include.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
and I still criticize the current admin over it
that alot of conservatives don't believe that non citizens have constitutional rights
No, I don't re-invent what it means and has meant for 200 years.
The Constitution has wording that is in and of itself absolute, but neither the framers or anyone else has ever treated it as such.
that alot of conservatives don't believe that non citizens have constitutional rights???
Can you be specific...there are certainly rights that are reserved only for citizens, like voting and holding public office....do you want those rights extended to non-citizens...
Are you lumping illegal aliens into that group of 'non-citizens'....because they enjoy some rights and privileges even over legal residents and citizens....and they have
no 'right' to even be in the country according to the laws of the US....
So the framers and authors of our Constitution weren't that smart huh?...they didn't really mean what they wrote....thats quite a claim....
Seems to me your pussy footing around trying to have it both ways....either you uphold the Constitution, as written, or you don't.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I disagree. many of the framers writings advocating for ratification have repeatedly stressed that there are things that the government cannot ever touch or do.
The Bill of Rights, and to a large extent the rest of the Constitution applies to all people, not just citizens. Thus the government, for example, has no right to limit the freedom of speech of a non-citizen any more than it does against a citizen. The government cant say, hey... citizens can own this type of gun, but non-citizens cant. You cant conduct an unreasonable search of a non-citizen any more than of a citizen.
You cant kill a non-citizen without the same due process as a citizen.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I'm not going to get in to all the different specifics, but a couple of them would be the right to own or carry a gun (some conservatives don't believe that non citizens have this right) or the right of habeus corpus (which alot of conservatives use this to allow indefinite detention at gitmo)
I never made any claims about the intelligence of the framers. That's pure distraction on your part. The creation of the wording in the Constitution was a negotiation based on give and take. You had some that were for one right or another being added in the Constitution and some that were against it. That's why you have the dichotomy between say the 9th and the 10th which can be read to be inconsistent with each other. That's why you have the limiting phrase in the second amendment independent of the absolute phrase.
I know you disagree. After the adoption of the Constitution, many framers went to work trying to cement the vision they were fighting for and limiting the efforts of their opponents to have the Constitution mean something else.
There were efforts to try to solidify their vision of the meaning, over the opposing vision.