• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Teaching Liberals Why Madison and Hamilton opposed the Bill of Rights.

Moot said:
Better yet, why don't you do some comprehensive reading on Constitutional history before making a thread about it?
Click to expand...

How about this, you actually provide a rebuttal that is more than "Nuh-uh" because, you know, this is a debate board so how you do that or sod off.
 
Fishking said:
How about this, you actually provide a rebuttal that is more than "Nuh-uh" because, you know, this is a debate board so how you do that or sod off.
Click to expand...

How about you read the thread before shooting off your mouth?
 
Moot said:
How about you read the thread before shooting off your mouth?
Click to expand...

I read multiple posts from you going on about nothing, with no premise. Did you finally get a rebuttal dragged out of you down the road? How many smokescreens to I have to go through to get to some actual meat and potatoes?
 
James972 said:
so you are saying govt could be so evil as to read the right to free speech as the right not to have free speech?
Click to expand...

That's taking it too far. An abridgment or conclusion are the concerns.
 
Fishking said:
I read multiple posts from you going on about nothing, with no premise. Did you finally get a rebuttal dragged out of you down the road? How many smokescreens to I have to go through to get to some actual meat and potatoes?
Click to expand...

I don't need to explain myself to you. If you don't like my posts then don't read them and move on.
 
ecofarm said:
That's taking it too far. An abridgment or conclusion are the concerns.
Click to expand...

too far? not really Adams, a liberal, arrested most of the opposition newspaper editors!
 
James972 said:
too far? not really Adams, a liberal, arrested most of the opposition newspaper editors!
Click to expand...

The founders understood rights are violated but not removed, political antics aside.
 
ecofarm said:
The founders understood rights are violated but not removed, political antics aside.
Click to expand...

putting the opposition in prison is removing their rights isn't it??
 
James972 said:
putting the opposition in prison is removing their rights isn't it??
Click to expand...

Violating rights. Inalienable (part of human social nature), not inviolable.
 
James972 said:
what?????
Click to expand...

When a tyrant kills an innocent person, that person did not lose their right to life, it was violated. When a prisoner is killed by the state, their right to life was not removed, it was violated (supposedly justly). There's no removing natural agreements (natural rights), merely violating them.

When the founders wrote, "inalienable", they didn't mean these things could not be violated, they meant the rights cannot be taken away, they're part of mankind as a result of social nature.
 
James972 said:
of course that's absurd. Wm F. Buckley Jr defined conservatism as " against govt" This is exactly the position our founders took. Did you think they wanted freedom from govt or.... the Girl Scouts?
Click to expand...

The Americans who remained loyal to the Crown were called Tories. Tory is the nickname for conservatives. Conservatives were loyal to the Crown. They viewed the rebels as traitors.
England became the greatest nation in the history of the world. It was surpassed by the US after 1945 when England was exhausted by the war. I believe the US would have achieved the same prominence had the revolution never taken place and may have achieved it sooner because it would have avoided the trauma of the revolution and having its ass kicked out of Canada in the War of1812 (Madison's War).
Thankfully, all that is far in the past and Canada, Britain and the US are the closest of allies.
 
ecofarm said:
When a tyrant kills an innocent person, that person did not lose their right to life, it was violated. When a prisoner is killed by the state, their right to life was not removed, it was violated (supposedly justly). There's no removing natural agreements (natural rights), merely violating them.

When the founders wrote, "inalienable", they didn't mean these things could not be violated, they meant the rights cannot be taken away, they're part of mankind as a result of social nature.
Click to expand...

so?? Did I disagree??
 
James972 said:
so?? Did I disagree??
Click to expand...

It's semantics. What you refer to as removal is violation not removal. Natural agreements (life, expression, self defense) transcend time and place.
 
ecofarm said:
It's semantics. What you refer to as removal is violation not removal. Natural agreements (life, expression, self defense) transcend time and place.
Click to expand...

know idea what your subject is?? Do you agree with op??
 
James972 said:
know idea what your subject is?? Do you agree with op??
Click to expand...

Sure. You take it too far and then partisan blah blah. The issues surrounding the BOR debate are larger than party, they're legitimate philosophical concerns and the reality of compromise to make things work.

You shouldn't belittle the intellectual value of the debate. It's not partisan garbage, meaningless rhetoric, an attempt to undermine founding principles or other shenanigans. It's a great and satisfying exploration of the bridge between philosophy and governance, and how The Enlightenment became state.
 
James972 said:
yes very true!! Democrats killed the melting pot to turn us into warring factions that they can exploit for votes and power.
Click to expand...

I wish that someone would realize that the democrats don’t really care about the people only when they want votes! For four years we had a president who didn’t condemn the damn racial issues that were created! Do you think that Madison or Hamilton would agree with today’s society?


Can’t censor this Patriot
 
really? honestly, I am not this educated person who tries to schools everyone because i know everything because I don't. Our founders were brilliant and, the constitution which is an important piece that we as American's should embrace and, uphold!
 
TheRepublican said:
really? honestly, I am not this educated person who tries to schools everyone because i know everything because I don't. Our founders were brilliant and, the constitution which is an important piece that we as American's should embrace and, uphold!
Click to expand...
Yes our founders created the greatest country in human history by far. In fact more black people came here after slavery than during slavery. Without America civilization on earth would cease to exist.
 
James972 said:
They opposed because the Constitution was very very clear about what power the federal govt was to have. It was to have only the few enumerated powers spelled in Article 1, Sec., 8. It had no power to, for example, limit freedom of speech; so why add a Bill of Rights to protect free speech when govt was to have no authority over the subject whatsoever. Further, they feared if it was added some would understand it to mean the federal govt had authority to protect speech and might use that authority to pervert and eliminate free speech.

In sum, Madison and Hamilton opposed even the Bill of Rights because they feared a big liberal govt would read as a Bill of Anti Rights. Little did they know that not even the specifically enumerated powers could contain the liberal Leviathan that was about to emerge, and that just 200 years later liberal socialists like Obama, Sanders and Warren would be are knocking on our door with undreamed of Anti American big govt schemes.
Click to expand...


Jesus....




Christ.....











Madison DRAFTED the Bill of rights.







https://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/bor

Bill of Rights - Bill of Rights Institute
 
James972 said:
of course that's absurd. Wm F. Buckley Jr defined conservatism as " against govt" This is exactly the position our founders took. Did you think they wanted freedom from govt or.... the Girl Scouts?
Click to expand...

"Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive." - William F. Buckley Jr.
 
James972 said:
They opposed because the Constitution was very very clear about what power the federal govt was to have. It was to have only the few enumerated powers spelled in Article 1, Sec., 8. It had no power to, for example, limit freedom of speech; so why add a Bill of Rights to protect free speech when govt was to have no authority over the subject whatsoever. Further, they feared if it was added some would understand it to mean the federal govt had authority to protect speech and might use that authority to pervert and eliminate free speech.

In sum, Madison and Hamilton opposed even the Bill of Rights because they feared a big liberal govt would read as a Bill of Anti Rights. Little did they know that not even the specifically enumerated powers could contain the liberal Leviathan that was about to emerge, and that just 200 years later liberal socialists like Obama, Sanders and Warren would be are knocking on our door with undreamed of Anti American big govt schemes.
Click to expand...
Might help if you knew the def of liberal.
Liber= free
For the individual and small gov.
Not some twisted small minds Fox regurgitation
That IS the def
 
James972 said:
Yes our founders created the greatest country in human history by far. In fact more black people came here after slavery than during slavery. Without America civilization on earth would cease to exist.
Click to expand...

Are you for real? The US is a great country but so are many others. If you mean freedom, the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands are just as free. (All Monarchies.)
If you mean military power, China and Russia are just as powerful, and you could include France and the UK in that as well.
The one area where the US is still in first place in economic power. This is partly due to acquiring an enormous land mass full of natural resources.
Whether a nation is a republic or a monarchy, conservative or liberal, or democratic socialist, seems to have no bearing on greatness.
 
Last edited:
queenmandy85 said:
Are you for real? The US is a great country but so are many others. If you mean freedom, the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands are just as free. (All Monarchies.)
If you mean military power, China and Russia are just as powerful, and you could include France and the UK in that as well.
The one area where the US is still in first place in economic power.
Whether a nation is a republic or a monarchy, conservative or liberal, or democratic socialist, seems to have no bearing on greatness.
Click to expand...
you seem a little lost. America saved civilization on earth through two world wars and re-created the world and its image and is now policemen to the world. We are at the source of morality on earth. American Republican capitalism just freed one .4 billion people in Communist ChinaIs just one tiny example of America is incredible contribution to the planet
 
James, Canada lost more soldiers than the US in the Great War. The US didn't enter the Great War until it had been underway for almost three years.
The same delay occurred in 1939 - 1942. However, without the contributions of American resources and tax payer's money, and Russian blood, we may have lost.
As for freeing the people of communist China, I haven't heard a news broadcast for the last 25 minutes. Did I miss something?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom