Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 (4151)	1/1/2017 4:04:35 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361507

I just finished making a case that the 9th amendment seems to say that it protects unenumerated rights. What was that again? In Message 30913599 you even mention the addition of rights. I'm not opposed to the idea of adding legal protection for more rights (certainly not categorically opposed), but I think the proper way to do so is through statue (for statutory rights) or amendment (for constitutional rights). From Message 30912731 You have "When I think about basic rights, I think first about the right of the individual to his person. No one can force thoughts on us or touch on us, for starters. No one can tell us that we can't get a mole removed of that we must get a mole removed. It's our person. The next immediate freedom is of intimate association, the most intimate being family. No one can tell us that we must marry or can't marry or whom to marry. No one can tell us that we can't reproduce or must reproduce or with whom to reproduce. Whatever label technically applies, IMO they are just basic rights, first and second order, and are subsumed by the Constitution even if not enumerated." Until that last phrase that seems to be more about broader political philosophy and principles rather than the constitution and the last phrase seems to asset the idea but not support it. that may be misleading because I have intentionally not used the term, "constitutional right." I spoke of natural rights and basic human dignity and enumerated and unenumerated rights and human rights. Enumerated and unenumerated refer to whether they are enumerated in law, most esp. in the constitution. Also you have been talking about the 9th and 10th amendments etc. they are also parts of the constitution. As for natural rights, I'm not claiming that they aren't rights (at least not as a category, people might easily have disagreements about them when you get to anything specific), just that they aren't protected by the constitution and thus are not "constitutional rights", unless they are enumerated (at least in a broad sense of the term enumerated, we can get more in to the weeds there if you want but basically the right to "free speech" and freedom of the press can be considered IMO to enumerate a broad right to freely communicate, not just to speak words and write and print newspapers, here the boundary of an enumerated rite, not trying to include something that isn't in mentioned at all). As for the utility of the 9th amendment, it strikes me as a general principle, that is useful if people support and accept it, but has little direct legal utility in constitutional interpretation. So, maybe the framers wanted an even ten amendments so they just threw some words together and labeled them nine? The founders didn't seem to mind including principles and justifications in the amendments that aren't specific legal requirements or prohibitions. The 9th being one example. "A well regulated militia" in the 2nd being another.