| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jmax
Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 25
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 7:16 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| all of these things were present under the tyranny of king george III. the magna carta reserved all of these rights from the invasiveness inherent in they system of tyranny. but to echo my previously stated point, there is no invasiveness inherent in a system of democracy. the stark similarities of the bill of rights to the magna carta show the antiquated nature of its significance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aross
Joined: 09 Apr 2010
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
On page 38, James Wilson said “In a government, consisting of enumerated powers such as is proposed for the United States, a bill of rights would not only be unnecessary, but….highly imprudent.” To even attempt to enumerate the given powers and rights to people would be impossible because the list is too long to list everything at once. And by enumerating only some over others, we are turning our backs on any or all rights not stated. These rights we do not enumerate, are they to be forgotten or ignored since we failed to specify them? If they are to be implied then why not put them on a Bill of Rights to begin with? And because of how fast our country may prosper in the world, how can we make sure these rights aren’t disputed or become outdated?
Wilson gave two outcomes of an “imperfect enumeration,” as he called it. One was that it would tip implied power towards the government leaving the rights of the people incomplete. The other being it would edge implied or believed rights to the people leaving the constitution and government incomplete. By favoring the government, the rights of the people will be ignored as time presses on sending us back to the monarchy we just broke away from. Conversely, a people with a weak government are bound to fall apart and submit to anarchy, an uncivilized and chaotic state of existence for the people of the United States. Both outcomes would be devastating to a developing country such as the United States. We are newborns living in an adult’s world and if we can’t get a good footing we will never be able to rise to the potential of a functioning nation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aross
Joined: 09 Apr 2010
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh and regarding the debate, I think it went pretty well. I believed the odds were slanted pretty favorably towards to the Pro-Bill of Rights team but I feel we held our own as Opponents to the Bill of Rights. Everyone seemed more comfortable with the process we were participating in so it made for a more interesting debate.
The open rebuttal time at the end of the class was by far the best part. At that point, I think we all got into our groove with our arguments so we were easily and calmly questioning each other and bringing new points to the table. The only downside was that this all occurred in the last 11 minutes of class, leaving no time to really get in depth with what made the bill of rights such a contested topic at the brink of its inception. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bantayso
Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Posts: 3
Location: Vietnam
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Free Forum
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
