It's the opposite of a permission slip - it doesn't convey any rights, your rights are endowed unto you by your creator. The Bill of Rights is simply a reminder to the Federal Government that the exercise of the specific enumerated powers WE THE PEOPLE ceded to the government do not under any interpretation of those powers include the power to infringe on those things set forth in the bill of rights. It's a prohibition list, directed at the government.
Yep. Dems have been undermining that concept forever, but it's in black and white,
"THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution."
Bold mine. You either support the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, or you don't.
The Bill of Rights are enumerated because the government's authority is also vested in the Constitution. If the government violates the Natural Rights enumerated, then the government forfeits the authority granted by that same document.
I suggest everyone read the preamble & bill of rights today.
Unfortunately, rights are subject to limitations. Whether you want to hear that or not. It’s the truth. The only question is: what limitations are permissible? I argue muzzles are not.
It's the opposite of a permission slip - it doesn't convey any rights, your rights are endowed unto you by your creator. The Bill of Rights is simply a reminder to the Federal Government that the exercise of the specific enumerated powers WE THE PEOPLE ceded to the government do not under any interpretation of those powers include the power to infringe on those things set forth in the bill of rights. It's a prohibition list, directed at the government.
Yep. Dems have been undermining that concept forever, but it's in black and white,
"THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution."
Bold mine. You either support the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, or you don't.
Government doesn't. Find me one person at any level of government who doesn't. They are the heroes, leaders and minority.
Since elected officials take an oath to the Constitution, one would think that they support it.
The Bill of Rights are enumerated because the government's authority is also vested in the Constitution. If the government violates the Natural Rights enumerated, then the government forfeits the authority granted by that same document.
I suggest everyone read the preamble & bill of rights today.
Unfortunately, rights are subject to limitations. Whether you want to hear that or not. It’s the truth. The only question is: what limitations are permissible? I argue muzzles are not.
If it can be limited, it's a privilege not a right.
It's a restriction slip -- against the government.