10/4/2005 12:49:11 PM
10/4/2005 1:31:25 PM
10/4/2005 1:40:29 PM
^i'll fight for that right
10/4/2005 1:46:31 PM
We used to have the right to association, the right to contract, the right to marry, and even the right to self determination. We lost some of these rights to over-reaching state laws, others we lost to the Federal Gov. All of them should have been protected by this nations courts, but excess democracy brought an end to all that.
10/4/2005 2:06:50 PM
There is a canon of construction called expressio unius est exclusio alterius, that the expression of one thing is the exclusion of all others. A simple example is that if you see a sign on a shop window that says no cats, parakeets, or goldfish allowed, you don't have to ask whether you can bring your dog in. Since dogs were not listed on the list of disallowed animals, they are allowed. In legal terms, it is used to say that if a lot of rights are listed, then you don't have any rights BUT those. the Ninth Amendment was intended to make sure this doctrine does nto apply to the Constitution.The practical effect of this amendment today is to give state governments carte blanche to do anything they like as long as it does not conflict with another provision of the Constitution.
10/4/2005 2:10:34 PM
That's the cool thing about the 9th and 10th amendments. You don't have to have a list of all the other rights. The goal in writing the Constitution was to specifically describe the limited things the national gov't could do. The amendments were included to really drive home the point that the gov't could only do so much. It's the opposite in Canada. There, the states (provinces) only have those specific powers given to them by their constitution. The national gov't retains all other powers. With us, the states retain all other powers that weren't specifically given up to the national gov't. Jefferson put it this way..
10/4/2005 11:56:32 PM