U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 06-03-2010, 12:15 PM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
6,519 posts, read 4,008,543 times
Reputation: 2651
Quote:
Originally Posted by dusk99 View Post
The founders owned slaves.
Your point?

A lot of individuals who have said and done great things have also done very bad things; do we dismiss the words and deeds of everyone who has done wrong?

BTW, not all founders owned slaves.

Since they setup a contract that protects the individual we should scrap it because of the personal lives of some who helped draft the contract?
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-03-2010, 01:47 PM
 
31,308 posts, read 16,544,458 times
Reputation: 14235
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi View Post
It is a man made contract between individuals and the government protecting the individuals. What good is a contract if it can be eliminated by the majority? You are saying that the minority does not have any rights because at any time they can be taken away by the majority.
I'm not sure why all this is all that surprising to you. There isn't a single line in the U.S. Constitution which enshrines the Bill of Rights as eternal. There isn't a single line in the Constitution which prohibits amending, revoking or completely erasing any other line in the Constitution so I would think that from a purely theoretical point of view that it should be fairly obvious that a super majority could remove those individual rights.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 02:16 PM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
6,519 posts, read 4,008,543 times
Reputation: 2651
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
I'm not sure why all this is all that surprising to you. There isn't a single line in the U.S. Constitution which enshrines the Bill of Rights as eternal. There isn't a single line in the Constitution which prohibits amending, revoking or completely erasing any other line in the Constitution so I would think that from a purely theoretical point of view that it should be fairly obvious that a super majority could remove those individual rights.
It is very obvious, the masses can do whatever they want with a willing court and politicians. We have spent 100 years tricking the masses into believing we are a majority rule democracy and majority rule is what we will get. That doesn't mean I like it or agree with it.

The Bill of Rights should have set the precedence that amendments were to enhance, not restrict freedom.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:00 PM
 
31,308 posts, read 16,544,458 times
Reputation: 14235
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi View Post
It is very obvious, the masses can do whatever they want with a willing court and politicians. We have spent 100 years tricking the masses into believing we are a majority rule democracy and majority rule is what we will get. That doesn't mean I like it or agree with it.The Bill of Rights should have set the precedence that amendments were to enhance, not restrict freedom.
You asked me what for what was basically a procedural question, what I didn't say was that since the Constitution was ratified no one has ever seriously attempted to amend or remove the Bill of Rights, they are embedded into the national conscience regardless of what you may believe to the contrary.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 09:46 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,141 posts, read 2,071,083 times
Reputation: 2363
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi View Post
It is very obvious, the masses can do whatever they want with a willing court and politicians. We have spent 100 years tricking the masses into believing we are a majority rule democracy and majority rule is what we will get. That doesn't mean I like it or agree with it.

The Bill of Rights should have set the precedence that amendments were to enhance, not restrict freedom.
No, it is not a clear as you portray it. We are not a democracy where the majority can just like that abuse a minority. The Founding Fathers argued that point for four long months while drafting The Constitution. That is why they came up with a Republic, I believe also called a representative democracy.
That is why the came up with a compromise on how Congress would be made up, by a Senate and a House of Representatives. This was to ensure the majority would not abuse a minority and a minority would not control a majority also.
In theory the nation CAN ammend the Bill of Rights or even delete them. I do not see that ever happening because our general national ideology would not allow us for that to ever happen. At least that is how I believe.

You have a great day.
El Amigo
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 11:05 PM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
6,519 posts, read 4,008,543 times
Reputation: 2651
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
No, it is not a clear as you portray it. We are not a democracy where the majority can just like that abuse a minority. The Founding Fathers argued that point for four long months while drafting The Constitution. That is why they came up with a Republic, I believe also called a representative democracy.
That is why the came up with a compromise on how Congress would be made up, by a Senate and a House of Representatives. This was to ensure the majority would not abuse a minority and a minority would not control a majority also.
In theory the nation CAN ammend the Bill of Rights or even delete them. I do not see that ever happening because our general national ideology would not allow us for that to ever happen. At least that is how I believe.

You have a great day.
El Amigo
In order to delete or remove the Bill of Rights we would need dupe the masses into believing majority rule (Democracy) even though as you say we are not one. Then we just need to elect politicians who give lip service to the constitution yet push for judges who believe in a living breathing constitution. Then that is how it could be removed.

The more we brainwash people into believing that we are a Democracy and our salvation comes from government, we have a good chance of changing our national ideology. I hope you are right though!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2010, 11:24 AM
 
31,308 posts, read 16,544,458 times
Reputation: 14235
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
The Founding Fathers
Ladies and gentlemen, let's not confuse two distinct group of individuals.

The Founding Fathers are considered to be those who lead the Revolution, the Framers were those who attended the Constitutional Convention.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2010, 11:57 AM
 
783 posts, read 395,249 times
Reputation: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Ladies and gentlemen, let's not confuse two distinct group of individuals.

The Founding Fathers are considered to be those who lead the Revolution, the Framers were those who attended the Constitutional Convention.
There is a balance between majority rule and minority rights a minority for example can not control a majority while the majority cant take away specific rights given to the minority.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2010, 01:28 PM
 
783 posts, read 395,249 times
Reputation: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi View Post
In order to delete or remove the Bill of Rights we would need dupe the masses into believing majority rule (Democracy) even though as you say we are not one. Then we just need to elect politicians who give lip service to the constitution yet push for judges who believe in a living breathing constitution. Then that is how it could be removed.

The more we brainwash people into believing that we are a Democracy and our salvation comes from government, we have a good chance of changing our national ideology. I hope you are right though!
Its majority rule with minority protections and specifik minority rights.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2010, 01:38 PM
 
31,308 posts, read 16,544,458 times
Reputation: 14235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultralight View Post
There is a balance between majority rule and minority rights a minority for example can not control a majority while the majority cant take away specific rights given to the minority.
Yes there is a very nice balance but you are absolutely wrong that those rights could not be taken away by a super majority.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top