Left vs Right, is as easy as: rights vs privileges

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
If the right had their way, companies and corporations would be completely unregulated and would abuse the worker much like we saw prior to the worker's revolts in the early 20th and late 19th century.

Yeah well that is what they use to call 'liberal'.

Freedom as in a free market.

Over 100 years of REGULATION sure hasn't done anything.

Except that business ownership isn't a 'right' it's a privledge.

Great example btw that shows how rights are whittled away in to nothing.

Create a 'reason' lots of them keep doing it for decades, and we end up with a totalitarian state.

would abuse the worker much like we saw prior to the worker's revolts in the early 20th and late 19th century.

Why yes it's so much 'better' when the state does the abusing isn't it ?

Guess people just love putting the Fox in charge of the hen houses.

The Constitution, among all the other things it is, is a COMPROMISE.

Between a national government and state governments.

Between large states and smaller states.

And arguably, between those who favor the good of the many and those who favor the good of the one.

The Constitution is is self-modifying, at least, the means to modify it are contained within it. This is because the compromise was to create a living document, that could grow and change with the times.

Many of the Bill Of Rights (another compromise) are negative rights for the People, just as the Articles establish structure and priority for the governments power.

The Preamble (not strictly a legal "part" of the COTUS I know) reflects the most basic compromises which I am showing as action statements:

Form a more perfect Union
Establish Justice
Insure Domestic Tranquility
Provide for the Common Defense
Promote the General Welfare
And sustain the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

I would say that the last two lines are the fundamental "split" between Liberals and Conservatives today.

Both, however, are one and the same within the document that makes us who we are as a Nation.

Perhaps we should all take an example from that.

a reply to: Gryphon66

The Constitution, among all the other things it is, is a COMPROMISE.

Uh not it's not.

The constitution was a limitation of the states power.

The Constitution is is self-modifying, at least, the means to modify it are contained within it. This is because the compromise was to create a living document, that could grow and change with the times.

Yeah well try reading the bill of rights. The core of that 'document'.

Especially the 9th.

Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

www.law.cornell.edu...

A right is a right.

Privilege never entered in to that equation.

Take gun ownership for example. It has been modified unconstitutionally. Because the mob wanted it so.

They are wrong.

The ONLY way the constitution can be amended is when it does not conflict with the bill of rights.

Some people think the bill of rights doesn't mean what it MEANS.

a reply to: neo96

What do you make of Articles I - VII then? Just window dressing? Get real.

Why do you always go to the negative?

I've read the Bill of Rights and I understand it as well as you do. As far as that being the "core" of the Constitution, you're mistaken. The Bill of Rights was a COMPROMISE, between the different factions, some wanting a stronger national government (due to the failure of the Articles) and some wanting power to remain diffuse within the States.

Yeah, yeah, and the Tenth means States don't have to listen to the Federal government, yada yada.

Forget the Supremacy Clause. And apparently, according to you, forget the entirety of the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights are Amendments and could logically therefore be Amended.

See Amendments XVIII and XXI for specific history.

But, since you don't think that Articles I-VII are important, I'm sure you're just going to offer more opinion rather than fact.