SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (4052)1/1/2017 12:59:38 AM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 358869
 
But I will argue that it is coercive and a constraint on the freedom of fellow citizens

I'd agree, which is why I'm against such laws in principle. OTOH I'd be just as against, or at least almost as against, laws which made stores shut down on Tuesday (or some other day in the unlikely event there is a noticeable religious group calling for such a shutdown because Tuesday is their sacred day)

IMO they are just basic rights, first and second order, and are subsumed by the Constitution even if not enumerated.

If not enumerated at all they aren't really constitutional rights. The constitution includes the 9th amendment. - "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" - and I think that's a good thing. People shouldn't try to infringe on rights that don't have constitutional protection, but the constitution only protects rights it actual refers to (even if not necessarily in absolutely direct terms). Courts can go beyond that and protect other rights, but in some cases their actions are such that its debatable whether they are protecting rights, or barring protection of them, and while they might claim constitutional support (since its isn't supposed to be their job to make up constitutional rights out of whole cloth) sometimes there is only dubious or even essentially non-existent support for those decisions.