Re: OT: Politics [Was:Social Contract]
Steve Lamb wrote:
[some excellent stuff]
[1] To explain for any non-Americans, it's a trick question. The Declaration
of Independence states that rights are inalienable and self-evident. The Bill
of Rights, part of the Constitution, enumerate these rights. It lists them.
A minor point, it enumerates *some* of the rights.
It does not grant them. This is an important distinction in granted versus
enumerated. In the absence of the Bill of Rights, if they were granted said
Not to disagree, but to elaborate...
The purpose of the Constitution of the USA was for the People, and the
States voluntarily to give up some of their rights to a Federal
Government. The Constitution does not create any rights, but rather
it carefully states what rights were being given up and vested
in the new Government being created. Thus, the Federal Government
could not do anything that the People could not have done.
rights would not continue to exist. Since it only lists them the implication
is if the Bill of Rights disappeared tomorrow, never to exist, we would still
have every right listed within it. That is a subtle but powerful difference
to understand. Most people don't. Thus the division of the elites and proles.
This is a consequence of the fact that, in the USA, the Sovereign is
the Electorate, unlike in other countries, where the Sovereign is
usually a person, or the State.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
Reply to: