From: Rex.Beard@f32.n373.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Rex Beard)
Newsgroups: hsv.general
Subject: Bill of Rights..
Date: Wed,  9 Sep 92 22:12:17 CDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:373/32

 LB> Leah.Wesolowski@p0.f2.n373.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Leah Wesolowski) 
 LB> writes: > 
>> >I am a Republican, no doubt, but I am even farther right that they 
>> >on certian issues. For instance I do not consider myself Pro life 
 
>> >I am against all methods of taking away the Bill of Rights.
>> 
>> ... you mean like the *Republicans* "war on drugs"???
     
	 It's already been stated that this is not the sole province of
	 the Republicans. The Democrats are just as much to blame.
     
 LB> Give me a paragraph number where The Bill of Rights says "You 
 LB> have the right to committ CRIMES.  It was not in the copy I 
 LB> read in school!!! 

    I guess I have to respond. There are a few problems with your
	interpretation of the Constitution. (At least acording to it's
	authors.)

	When someone claims that that the war on drugs is taking away
	the Bill of Rights, you respond that you don't have the right
	to commit crimes. Here are a few problems.

	First, the poster never said anything about commiting a crime.
	They only said the war on drugs was taking away Constitutional
	rights. For example do you think that the Bill of Rights lists
	the right to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures?

	If someone was searched without a search warrant in the name of the
	war on drugs, would you say that it was a violation of the Bill of
	Rights? And at the same time no crime was committed.

	Next, is perhaps the biggest error. I'll explain it by example.
	Suppose that Congress outlaws free speach. Now if someone speaks
	freely they have certainly broken the law, right? Well, by the
	reasoning in your post that someone would not have the "right
	to break the law."

	The point I'm trying to make is perhaps the law itself is
	un-Constitutional.

	The next error you make is the most dangerous. You seem to say that
	if a "right" is not listed in the Bill of Rights, then it is not
	a "right".  That is untrue. I refer yo uto the 9th and 10th
	amendments in the Bill of Rights. They basically say that just because
	there is a list of rights that doesn't mean that these are the *only*
	rights.

	In fact, if you read the Federalist Papers (And I think every voter
	should read them) you will find that the authors of the Constitution
	*opposed* a Bill of Rights! You know why? They were afraid that
	*someday* Americans would think that because there was a list that
	it was a comprehensive list. Those were the only rights. Hence the 9th
	and 10th amendments.

	Eventually Madison (the main author of the Constitution)  became a
	strong supporter of the Bill of Rights because it was the *only* way
	some states would ratify the Constitution. But at first, he opposed
	it.

	People yelled we need a Bill of Rights. What if Congress passes a law
	against the freedom of speach. Madisons response? How *could* Congress
	pass such a law? Congress doesn't have the *power* to abrige speach.
	Right there in the Article I those are all the powers of Congress.
	And here he would have used statements similar to yours (and
	in this case applicable.)

 LB> Give me a paragraph number where The [Constitution] says "[Congress] 
 LB> ha[s] the [power] to [Abrige speach].  It was not in the copy I 
 LB> [wrote]!!! 

 That is the dangerous trap you have fallen into. You have reversed
 the whole basis of our government. It is the *Government* that must
 cite chapter and verse in the Constitution to show why it has the
 *power* to do a thing. It is *not* the people.

 The only time the Bill of Rights should come in to play is when one of
 the powers of government listed in the Constitution, conflicts with one
 of the *rights* in the Bill of Rights. The Rights win out every time.

 And of course the only way to get people in office who *respect* the
 Constitution is to vote Libertarian this year.

 -rex-

--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]
 * Origin: Internet/Fidonet gateway of Huntsville (HST/V32)
--  
 = Micro Magic, 830-2362,  Alabama's Usenet/Fidonet gateway.
 = Reply-To:  Rex.Beard@f32.n373.z1.FIDONET.ORG