posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:14 PM
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Dilligaf28
Freedom of Speech extends to all business contracts, as well as the U.S. government, and corporations can not violate your right to freedom of speech
any more than government. Once again, your claim that the U.S. government is only supposed to protect peoples rights from the U.S. government is not
only false, but patently ridiculous.
It is also ridiculous to demand that I prove that the U.S. Constitution was not intended to only apply to protection of our rights against government,
you want me to prove a negative. You must prove that the U.S. Constitution was written only to protected rights from government abuse.
But there is the 9th amendment.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Clearly the people who wrote the Bill of Rights recognized that there would be additional areas where people would need to make sure that government
protected their rights, and against corporate abuse clearly falls into this category.
Lets start with and easy example.
Do you believe in child labor?
U.S. law prevents businesses from hiring children and putting them to work, except in special circumstances. The Department of Labor that
Republicans want to eliminate oversees protecting abuse of child labor.
This is one very obvious reason why we need the Department of Labor.
Freedom of speech does not extend to contract law nor does it extend into the workplace. My employer can tell me to say "happy holidays instead of
merry christmas" and I have to do so. If I choose to say Merry Christmas I will be fired. There is nothing illegal about a corporation firing me
for saying things that the corporation does not want said. I'm sorry that you feel otherwise but your feelings cannot change the truth.
I am not asking you to prove a negative. I, along with most of the free world, recognize that the Constitution was written to provide for a limited
government and to protect the rights of the people from that government. You have asserted that I am wrong about this and its because your assertion
is so outside the scope of the truth about the Constitution that you must prove your assertion to be true.
You quoted the ninth amendment. You do realize this amendment is a shining example of how the framework of the Constitution is set in place to limit
the Federal Government and protect the people's rights!
The exceptions here or elsewhere in the constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance
of other rights retained by the people; or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or
as inserted merely for greater caution.[5
This was what James Madison submitted to congress as a precursor to the ninth amendment. Read that carefully. This is James Madison, one of the
Founders, saying that the Bill of Rights does not enlarge the power of the Constitution; rather the BOR limits the government and is in place also as
a means of caution against the expansion of Government powers.
It is incredibly intellectually dishonest of you to take my statements of fact, dispute them, and then tell me to prove my viewpoints. I have
repeatedly asked you to, rather than continually insist that I am supposed to prove the truth to you, to please provide some sort of statement that
defends your supposition that the Constitution is somehow not written to protect We The People from our Government nor is it written to provide a
limited framework of government. Your position is contrary to what is accepted fact and legal interpretation so it truly is up to you to support your
position with more than just "this is what I say and its true because I say it".
If you cannot engage in a proper discussion, following accepted rules of debate, then I feel there is no point in continually going in circles with