Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by johnny2127
Go right ahead. Tell us how the Right would "protect" the constitution.
I am sure I understand that the Right likes the 2nd Amendment, and the 10th Amendment because you know, guns and states rights and all, but far as I
can see, the Right, hates individual constitutionally protected Rights.
I mean hell, the Arizona law is completely against the 4th Amendment, and the Right loved it. Forcing people to keep their IDs on them at all times.
No problem my friend.
Here are the Amendments you think the right wants to destroy, and my take on the right's position on them:
1st Amendment: Protects the freedom of religion, speech, and the press, as well as the right to assemble and petition the government
The right firmly believes in freedom of religion and speech, and the right to assemble. However, the right feels that Christians are actually
tolerated less and afforded less freedom than other religions. When a Christian or Jewish person is asked to removed their religious symbols in
public schools, but a person practicing Islam is not, the right feels this is wrong. The right believes in freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM
Regarding freedom of speech, they are hardcore proponents of this. The right does fear things such as the 'fairness doctrine' though, even though
media is dominated by liberals.
3rd Amendment: Prohibits the forced quartering of soldiers
I have no clue where you have ever gotten the idea that the right wants military and martial law in the US. The right is actually absolutely fearful
of a military state. The fact that you really think the right believes what you stated shows you have many misconceptions of the right.
4th Amendment: Prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets out requirements for search warrants based on probable cause
Your argument about them wanting to do away with this law was pointing out Arizona's SB 1070. The right's contention is that if you are already in
the process of committing a crime, or a law enforcement official has reasonable suspicion that you are an illegal immigrant, it is constitutional to
ask for proof you are here legally. Additionally, the right does think that the founding father's intended the states to be as powerful or more so
than the federal govt, and so if the federal govt doesn't police their boarders, they have the right to enforce immigration. The right would like all
boarders closed to all illegal immigrants, regardless of race or country of origin.
5th Amendment: Sets out rules for indictment by grand jury and eminent domain, protects the right to due process, and prohibits self-incrimination
and double jeopardy
Your example on this one is the birthers, as you call them. As far as that allegation goes, we all know that all sides through allegation about about
political opponents without proof of guilt or evidence. That is not about the right or left. Thats about a sad part of human nature that allows many
to vilify others without remorse.
As far as this actual amendment goes, the right as huge supporters of it. Again, the right wants a smaller, less intrusive govt, and views this
Amendment as key to keeping the federal govt at bay.
6th Amendment: Protects the right to a fair and speedy public trial by jury, including the rights to be notified of the accusations, to confront
the accuser, to obtain witnesses and to retain counsel
Your example on this one was those detained in Gitmo. The issue you bring up to the right is a matter of who is afforded this constitutional right.
Many on the right contend that those caught in war are criminal combatants and should be handled in military court. The right feels though that those
accused of a crime within US borders that are citizens and not involved with a foreign war should be afforded the full rights and protections of the
7th Amendment: Provides for the right to trial by jury in certain civil cases, according to common law
You contention here is that the right thinks juries are socialist. I completely disagree. I think what you may be referring to is the right's
dislike of tort attorneys and what they view as frivolous lawsuits. In no way does the right want to do away with any juries of any type. What the
right does want is tort reform, and limit of civil penalties in some cases. A woman should not be awarded $2.86 million for burning her mouth on hot
coffee at McDonald's. I think we would all agree that ambulance chasing attorneys and frivolous lawsuits have gotten out of control.
8th Amendment: Prohibits excessive fines and excessive bail, as well as cruel and unusual punishment
Your example, again was Gitmo. Which at this point should be pointed out that Obama has kept running. Much of this debate comes down to the same
thing as the 6th Amendment. I.E. those caught in war not receiving this constitutional right. Anyways, beyond that, the right is somewhat split on
this. Some contend that to protect the nation, in extreme situation torture is acceptable. Think Jack Bauer torturing to find the location of a bomb
before it goes off.
Many others on the right contend however that torture should never be allowed as many war veterans now on the right were tortured themselves.
9th Amendment: Asserts the existence of unenumerated rights retained by the people
Your comment here was about the right wanting the states to have their rights back. I have no clue how you applied that to this amendment and somehow
came to the conclusion the right would want to take rights away from people. They are directly related, and the states NOT having their
constitutional rights, have taken rights away from the citizens of the states. The states were intended to have all rights not given to the federal
govt. Over time, Federal govt has taken many of these rights. Thats not a theory but a fact. That is the 10th Amendment, which you left out of
FROM HERE ON OUT YOU DON'T GO BY AMENDMENT AND JUST SAY THE RIGHT IS STUCK IN THE 1800'S AND THINK THESE AMENDMENTS ARE COMMUNIST
11th Amendment: Immunity of states from suits from out-of-state citizens and foreigners not living within the state borders. Lays the foundation
for sovereign immunity
13th Abolishes slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime
I sincerely hope you aren't saying that the right wants a return to slavery. That would be one of the most ridiculous statements in a long long
time. It was the right that lead the charge for an end to slavery my friend.
14th Amendment: Defines citizenship and deals with post–Civil War issues
This Amendment was enacted to deal primarily with granting slaves citizenship and equal protection under the constitution.
As far as any debate about it today, the closest would be concerning illegal immigrants. Many believe that so called 'anchor babies' should not be
considered US citizens. That opinion is from some on both the left and right, but more on the right. There is not a consensus opinion on the right
for the anchor baby issue yet.
15th Amendment: Prohibits the denial of suffrage based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude
Again, the right lead the suffrage movement and it was the left that stood in the way of it. Fast forward to modern times and the only debate I can
think of that you may be referring to in Affirmative Action. With that in mind, the right feels that Affirmative Action itself is racist in nature
and gives preferential treatment to people based on race or sex. The right feels that any race or sex denied something purely based on their race or
sex violates the 15th amendment. So the right is actually a huge supporter of this Amendment.
16th Allows the federal government to collect income tax
You could be referring to many things here. You may be referring to the movement that contends the federal govt has no right to collect income tax.
Or you could be referring to the right wanting to reform the US tax code.
If you are speaking of the movement contending the govt doesn't have a right to collect income taxes, I would say that this movement is so small that
the it doesn't blip on the right's radar. The right does believe the govt has the right to collect income taxes. Although many on the right do
want to reform the tax code to a flat tax or some variation thereof. That isn't a matter of constitutionality, but what they feel is best for the
economy as a whole.
17th Amendment: Allows senators to be directly elected
I have absolutely no clue what problem you think the right has with this amendment. They fully support it.
19th Amendment: Allows for women's suffrage
See above what I wrote about the 15th Amendment...
21st Amendment: Repeals the Eighteenth Amendment
The 18th Amendment made alcohol illegal. I assume you are somehow referring to the right wanting to make alcohol illegal again. If thats what you
are saying, then you are categorically wrong.
24th Amendment: Prohibits the revocation of voting rights due to the non-payment of poll taxes
Another one where I have no clue what problem you think the right has with this Amendment.
26th Amendment: Establishes 18 as the national voting age
And yet another one where I have no clue what your contention is here.
You seem to have both an amazing dislike of the right, and a ton of very very inaccurate misconceptions about what the right believes.
Here is something that I think is important for you and the rest of readers to understand. The right wants a small govt that is mostly out of
people's lives. They want a free market and low taxes for all. Basically, an non-intruisive govt. The vast majority of the right was very
dissatisfied with George Bush as a President because he violated those principals and grew govt dramatically while take many civil liberties away from
people. Those things are not views of the right. Hence why so many refused to support Republicans in 2008. With the tea Party movement and the
change in platform of the right, the right is returning to its more conservative roots. Not those of Bush.
Instead of assuming things about the right and lobbing insults and accusations, try talking to some. I think you'll find that you see eye to eye or
can at least respect the opinions of many more than you think.