Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Suave
In recognizing these rights, it is according them. Rights do not exist ipso facto; they are created for and by societies. If the US dissolves (which I extrapolate to mean into anarchy) then those rights are no longer existant.
|
HUGE disagreement here. If the US were to dissolve, I'd still have the right to free speech and religion. I'd still have the right to be reasonably secure in my home. I'd still have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and I'd still have the right to keep and bear arms to protect and secure those other rights. The government does not grant these rights to me, they are inalienable rights as written by the founders who acknowledged that they pre-exist.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Suave
I do understand what you mean about people wanting to amend the Bill of Rights though. The government amending something that is meant to keep them in check is a bit of a conflict of interest.
|
the government cannot just 'amend' the constitution. There is a huge expansive process that ultimately needs the consent of a supermajority of the people in order to ratify a new amendment. What we have now is a minority of people using their influence among legislatures to 'regulate' rights out of existence. The gun control act is the best example of it. From there it just slides down to states and localities.