Tuesday, 12/15/09, Public Square

During the debates on the adoption of the Constitution, its opponents repeatedly charged that the Constitution as drafted would open the way to tyranny by the central government. Fresh in their minds was the memory of the British violation of civil rights before and during the Revolution. They demanded a “bill of rights” that would spell out the immunities of individual citizens. Several state conventions in their formal ratification of the Constitution asked for such amendments; others ratified the Constitution with the understanding that the amendments would be offered.

The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the “Bill of Rights.”

Amendment I —  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II —  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III —  No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV —  The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V —  No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI —  In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII —  In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII —  Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

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

Amendment X —  The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

29 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

29 responses to “Tuesday, 12/15/09, Public Square

  1. Very powerful ideas.

    I went to a workshop in August to Larned State Hospital. It is an interesting place – 90 acres filled with various state run agencies – a couple of prisons, state hospital wards, and Lord knows what else.

    Talked to various farmers & employees of the place. The sexual predator legislation arranged by Attorney General Carla Stovall (of the great state of Kansas, and current spouse of Ag radio man, Larry Steckline) is often discussed by these folk. This legislation allows a prisoner to be automatically civil-ly committed to ongoing incarceration/treatment if the person is identified as being a sexual predator. This statute seems to me to clearly defy Ammendment number V. Carla argued her case before the “very liberal Supreme Court” – who found nothing wrong with the state statute/process.

    But, who wants to stand up for the rights of sexual predators? In a rare moment of investigative journalism, the Wichita Eagle showed that the person who determined the status of sexual predators at LSH, always conferred such a status when asked to – with assessment methods that were not empirically tested.

    But who cares, standing up for the rights of so-called sexual predators is not especially welcomed by anybody, really.

    Didn’t Christ say “if you do these things unto the least of these my brethern, you have done them unto me”?

    • Even with sexual predators we need to be very careful in who made the determination and what they used in that evaluation.

      Seems we’ve stretched far afield from the rights intended on more than one occasion, doesn’t it?

  2. lilacluvr

    I am so disgusted right now with Obama and the Congressional Democrats for giving in to Lieberman. WTF???

    Maybe Americans are just too arrogant and stupid to even deserve what the rest of the industrialized countries enjoy?

    I thought Obama was better than this..

    • The last time Lieberman showed he isn’t of the Democratic Party in any way, shape of form, I hoped they would strip him of his chairmanship(s). This time I don’t even pretend they will.

    • I know I have said this before, so please forgive me for saying it again.

      The “negotiations” that have been taking place surrounding this “reform” have been taking place amongst the very weasels that have driven up the price of healthcare while pocketing millions. The “reform” is obviously not meant to help any of us out, so why be mad at Lieberman? Yes, he is a dickhead. But so are the rest of them and all of this talk about the republicans and Lieberman being the ones that are obstructing is just SMOKE AND MIRRORS. Our Democratic Senators and Congressmen are selling us down the river and trying to blame the opposition.

      Don’t buy into this load of crap. Be angry with those that are responsible–it’s all of them!! And, yes, Obama is included, I am sorry to say.

      He knows full well how the system works and he is letting it work the way it he knows it will. He knows who will benefit. Is he looking the other way or does he not care? I don’t pretend to know the answer to that question.

      I just know that our political system is thoroughly corrupt and this “reform” is going to screw the little guy, line corporate pockets and make a lot of politicians wealthier and more powerful.

      • lilacluvr

        Yes, I realize you’re right – it is not just about Lieberman. But when Obama and the White House makes it quite obvious to everyone that even a Joe Lieberman can throw the entire train off the track, why even bother to think any of them are anything but the usual, dime a dozen, corrupt politicians.

        It really does not matter who is in the White House – does it?

        So, let’s have the Democratic Party start a little tea bagging movement of our own.

        But, I’ve got a problem – I don’t have a horse and I don’t have a Paul Revere costume – whatever will I do??

      • I don’t have the horse or costume either, but think that’s just fine. The teabaggers aren’t a group I want to join. Maybe some part of them, but I saw other factions I won’t be associated with.

        And, if I had it to do over again, I would still vote for Obama over McCain. I can’t even imagine how big a mess we would be facing if McCain had been the one to have all those challenges dumped in his lap last January.

        Don’t you think the bush administration knew full well it would be the Democrats who would have to clean up after them, who would suffer the blame for it not happening quickly enough?

      • I think that the Democrats and Republicans are pulling a “good cop, bad cop” routine on all of us.

        Maybe we could come to a concensus with the tea baggers on that one. Maybe one concensus could lead to another and we could all stop attacking each other and start attacking the corporate interests that have truly earned our ire.

  3. I have two thoughts on the subject of health-care reform.

    First — the elected representatives of the Democratic Party are bought and paid for and don’t have enough sense to even attempt a cover for their malfeasance. I gave them credit they don’t deserve, thought them capable of working for Americans.

    Second — the health-care reform being proposed is so flawed I will be glad if it fails.

    But, I feel betrayed. I thought much-needed health-care reform would happen on this watch and now I realize it won’t. It won’t because of the number of legislators in the insurance and pharmaceutical companies pockets and also because the Democratic Party Reps and Senators have no idea how to push anything through.

    I’m sad to know other Americans (ya know citizens of that country supposedly great and all) will die, will face bankruptcy, will suffer from lack of health care. I’m sad even to think that we call ourselves civilized. I’m more sad than mad, but anger is in there too.

  4. I’ve felt, and still feel strongly, the Republicans would prefer America fail before any Democratic initiative meet with success. I don’t blame the Republicans for this failure in reforming health care. This failure is owned by the Democratic Party.

    I have no hope anything will change no matter who is elected.

  5. lilacluvr

    Has anyone else read the piece in the WEbsite about Todd Tiarht’s wife, Vicki, has been tweeting lately?

    Seems she has been disparaging certain C Street Family members, John McCain and some Consevative Group for Fiscal Growth that ranked Todd 29% as to Jerry Moran’s 98%.

    I suspect things are going to get nastier as time goes on.

    What do you think?

    • No doubt the race between those two men will be an ugly one. I didn’t know Mrs. Tiahrt was participating, but I’m not surprised. The only good thing about that contest is one of them will lose.

      • lilacluvr

        The way the CONS on the other blog are talking about Moran being a do-nothing, then we are better off if Moran does win.

        At least he won’t be doing anything….

  6. lilacluvr

    Given the choice between McCain and Obama, of course I would still vote for Obama. (scary thought that McCain would drop over dead and then SP would be in charge).

    I just wish Obama would start kicking some butt like he means it. I mean really, if he thinks he is going to be rewarded with another term on his role as a peacemaker with the Republicans, then he is mistaken.

    Maybe he is counting on the fact that the GOP is in such shambles currently that there is no danger of his losing in 2012?

    Maybe this is the ‘darkest before the dawn’ time in Obama’s strategy??

    Only time will tell…..

  7. lilacluvr

    Another thought just hit me – Tiarht was once riding high in the GOP – remember??

    I wonder what it feels like to be shunned by the other big whigs of the GOP? Seems like nobody really is in Todd’s camp right now.

    Maybe that ‘purity test’ is getting to him?

  8. lilacluvr

    As an interesting note – on the other blog, there are numerous new nics coming in and defending Mrs. Tiarht.

    I wonder what that is all about???

  9. lilacluvr

    Did anyone else see Rachel Maddow last night? She had video of a reporter talking to Sen. Brownback about his feelings regarding the Uganda proposal to punish homosexuals with prison and even the death penalty.

    Brownack’s response to the question was – he did not know what the reporter was talking about. When the reporter told him that Rachel Maddow has been covering it and then went on to say that Uganda is going to pass a law that would use the death penalty against homosexuals.

    First, Brownback said that he did see something about that when he was watching Rachel Maddow while doing his workout but he did not get to see the entire coverage.

    Second, Brownback said that he does not comment on any piece of legislation that he has not read or has done research about.

    WTF? How hard is it to simply say you’re against the death penalty used on people just for being homosexuals?

    At least John Ensign had the common sense to say that the Uganda death penalty law was wrong.

    And, to think, Brownback will probably end up being our governor. Yippee…..

    • Uganda is one of the many countries working closely with members of The Family.

      Here’s an interesting passage from Jeff Sharlet’s book, “The Family”: ‘Youth Corps Vision,’ is intended only for members of the Family. The Vision is to mobilize thousands of young people worldwide — committed to the principles, precepts, and person of Jesus Christ.

      A group of highly dedicated individuals who are united together having a total commitment to use their lives to daily seek to mature into people who talk like Jesus, act like Jesus, think like Jesus. The group will have the responsibility to:

      — see that the commitment and action is maintained to the overall vision;

      –see that the finest and best invisible organization is developed and maintained at all levels of the work;

      –even though the structure is hidden, see that the Family atmosphere is maintained, so that all people can feel a part of the Family.

      Youth Corps, whose programs are often centered around Ivanwald-style houses, prepares the best of its recruits for positions of power in business and government abroad. Its programs are in operation in Russia, Ukraine, Romania, India, Pakistan, Uganda, Nepal, Bhutan, Ecuador, Honduras, Peru, and other countries. The goal: Two hundred national and international world leaders bound together relationally by a mutual love for God and the family."

      The brochures they distribute are pleasant, featuring endorsements from political leaders and full of enthusiastic rhetoric about helping young people to learn the principles of leadership. The name Jesus is never mentioned. They keep the involvement between The Family and Youth Corps Vision secret (they call it privacy) and they think of it as a sort of humility. It is nothing of the sort; the Family renounces public accountability, not power.

  10. David B

    They tried to interview Brownback while he was walking down the sidewalk in Washington. Who expects him to be able to walk and think all at the same time?????

    ****
    This is essentially the collapse of health care reform in the United States Senate,”

    “Honestly the best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill, go back to the House, start the reconciliation process, where you only need 51 votes and it would be a much simpler bill.”

    Howard Dean

  11. Here’s some ingenuity in action:

    The North Face sues Ladue’s The South Butt

    The North Face made good on its threat to sue The South Butt.

    The international apparel maker filed a federal lawsuit in St. Louis late last week alleging trademark infringement by The South Butt, a Ladue-based company started by a teenager to make fun of The North Face name.

    The South Butt does not appear to be backing down from the fight. “We embrace the litigation,” said St. Louis attorney Al Watkins, who represents The South Butt.

    This long-simmering dispute between the two companies first made a splash two months ago. An attorney for The North Face sent a letter to The South Butt demanding it stop selling its T-shirts, fleeces and shorts. The South Butt refused — and then publicized the letter. Attention followed, and sales spiked, Watkins said.

    Watkins now hopes the lawsuit will goose sales some more.

    continue reading:
    http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/business/stories.nsf/story/03E9ACA33F9AF47B8625768D0006EA3D?OpenDocument

    Griffin is laughing at this story and is hoping The South Butt wins against The North Slope and can come out with a line they call In Your Face. 🙂

  12. David B

    Lieberman has pissed me off. So I donated a few bucks to MoveOn.org’s Lieberman campaign.

  13. David B

    Way too smart!!

    Dr. McKitrick… suggests imposing financial penalties on carbon emissions that would be set according to the temperature in the earth’s atmosphere. The penalties could start off small enough to be politically palatable to skeptical voters.

    If the skeptics are right and the earth isn’t warming, then the penalties for burning carbon would stay small or maybe even disappear. But if the climate modelers and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are correct about the atmosphere heating up, then the penalties would quickly, and automatically, rise.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/15/science/15tier.html?hpw

  14. This is from memory, so there may be a few inaccuracies.

    The “Bill of Rights” as originally proposed consisted of twelve amendments. The first three were combined into one (the First Amendment as ratified) making the number of amendments ten, rather than twelve.

    As originally proposed, the twelve amendments were, in my opinion, divided into four general categories. The first three (now one) limited the power of the government (Federal) to interfere with the basic rights of citizens within the country as enumerated. The next three were to protect the home and property of the citizenry against governmental overreaching, as well to acknowledge the need for a way to have a militia for defense without maintenance of a large standing army. The next four were intended to provide safeguards to individuals within the context of the legal system. The final two were general in nature, in recognition that otherwise the doctrine of inclusio unius, exclusio alterius might be used to limit the fundamental rights of the citizens to those set out previously, which would be contradictory to the philosophical foundation of the Declaration of Independence, inter alia.

    Have a good time with this.

    • inclusio unius, exclusio alterius: the inclusion of one is the exclusion of another

      inter alia: among other things

      Okay, now I have the Latin translated and I’ll read the post again. I wish I was better educated! I have a fine mind but it lacks the training and discipline it needs. 🙂

      • My apologies, fnord (and others); sometimes the “native language” takes over, especially when it saves key strokes. :->

      • You know you’re one of my heroes, 6176! Why would I want to depend on an attorney who wasn’t waaaaay smarter and much better educated than me? I want the professionals in my life to be the best, even if I need to remind them to speak English.