Republicans versus the Bill of Rights

[Burgold]

One of Bang's Post in the Florida Doctor thread made me think about this. At first, I thought it was just a very silly idea, but then I read the post again and thought about other issues from banning Sharia law to warrantless wiretapping, refusal of due process in Guantanamo, to the government and Conservative majority Supreme Court affirming the government has the right to seize the property of Americans without permission, etc. The Republicans have been beating up on the Bill of Rights a lot over the last ten years. Perhaps, this could be said of both parties, but let's take a look. Mind you, I'm just going off the top of my head and not researching or even googling for examples.

• First Amendment –

Let's use this new Florida law forbidding doctors to talk about guns as an example. Let's also toss in the anti-Sharia law laws. Finally, let's add in Bachman's attempts to ban all pornography.

• Second Amendment – Militia (United States), Sovereign state, Right to keep and bear arms.

No major conflict here although Republicans spearheaded legislation to prevent weapons and items that could be used as weapons on airplanes.

• Third Amendment – Protection from quartering of troops.

Laws recently passed and protected by Conservative Majority of the Supreme Court allowing the Government to seize the land of citizens without permission.

• Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

Warrantless wiretapping. Invasion of privacy in looking through bills, library records, etc. all without warrant or proof of cause.

• Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.

Held combatants and terror suspects for years without due process or even charge.

• Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel

Look at the above. The Republicans decided if you were caught overseas, even if you were American, the right to jury, speedy trial, and the right to counsel disappeared.

• Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.

No trials for years.

• Eighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

Torture. Secret prisons.

• Ninth Amendment – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

Not sure about this one off the top of my head.

• Tenth Amendment – Powers of States and people.

Too many to list. Bush and Republicans expanded federal powers innumerable times.

---------- Post added July-16th-2011 at 08:23 AM ----------

And heck, I haven't even gone into any of the Arizona insanity.

[Bang]

FTR, i don't realy have much problem with how we treat enemy combatants and terrorists.

i'd like to think we are DAMN sure that is who we have in Gitmo. They better be right about who's there.

But if they are.. no problem keeping them there.

(I'm weird in that I trust the military more than the government when it comes to this sort of thing. I think they will be much more likely to be positive before they just lock someone away and throw away the key. I think the military is a MUCH more ethical body than our civilian government.. )

secret prisons in other parts of the world.. now that is another kettle of fish.

~Bang

[Burgold]

FTR, i don't realy have much problem with how we treat enemy combatants and terrorists.

i'd like to think we are DAMN sure that is who we have in Gitmo. They better be right about who's there.

But if they are.. no problem keeping them there.

secret prisons in other parts of the world.. now that is another kettle of fish.

~Bang

I don't either, but I do think we need some type of trial or investigation to make sure we are damned sure. There were hundreds of people released after being held for years that apparently were found to just have been at the wrong time and place and had no terror relationships. Frankly, I don't care if it is a civilian trial or a military one, but I do want some body looking at the evidence and judging it.

Also, I can understand our desire to compromise our rights in the name of safety and sometimes it's even the right thing to do, but we ought to be very careful once we start. For example, I'm for banning box cutters and guns on flights. It's still a limitation on the second ammendment, but I don't mind that compromise.

[ACW]

Both sides suck (Patriot Act and the extension, Obama=Bush, etc). That SCOTUS case of eminent domain was 5-4 with the liberal side (and Kennedy) allowing it; same breakdown for not allowing medical pot.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Like I said in a thread a while ago, the republicans want to destroy the 7th Amendment, or at least make it ok to completely ignore it.

More broadly though, its true that Republicans and Democrats both want smaller government WHERE THEY WANT IT. They simply disagree about where government should be smaller and where it should be bigger. Personally, I think the first, fourth, fifth, and seventh amendments are more important than making sure I don't have pay a little more in taxes, or get taxed if i don't buy healthcare. But that's me.

What is more frustrating is the arguments that the GOP wants small government and the DEMs want big government. That is true for some issues, but the opposite is true from some issues as well.

And yes, Obama really let me down with the Patriot Act.... but a lot of dems in Congress still fight to get rid of it.

[Destino]

If ICE declares you illegal you get no right to speedy trial even if you are a US citizen. Google it. Rights are "from the creator" when they argue that the US is. Christian nation but that all goes out the window when it suits them. So is tha a f you to God or is that an admission that the rights don't come from God?

Democrats aren't any better. Obama has stepped up illegal immigration prosecution and expanded the use of for profit prisons to house them. The introduction of a profit motive has increases detention times and detainment nationwide. He's stripped the opposition of the democrats to the system and provided political cover for torture programs and secret tribunals.

Meanwhile both parties are entirely in the pocket of big busiess.

[Teller]

I don't either, but I do think we need some type of trial or investigation to make sure we are damned sure.

Then let's pull out of Geneva, if that's even possible. We have the right to hold enemy combatants (enemy prisoners of war) "until the end of hostilities."

[allannis]

The title of this thread should be changed, the word Republican should be changed to Congress ( on a side note this is a good example of how main stream media shows bias)

[Destino]

FYI - a "fair trial" isn't a bonus for the gilded American class of supreme humans. It's there because it's the best way a society has come up with to establish guilt. If you trust the government to know who is guilty without trial for some why not support it for yourself? Are you special and better than people from somewhere else? Stand for something!

This position of screw "them" if it makes me slightly safer is why Japanese Americans found themselves in camps. All of you know that was wrong but when it's your ass on the line you support similar policy? You know better.

[techboy]

• Third Amendment – Protection from quartering of troops.

Laws recently passed and protected by Conservative Majority of the Supreme Court allowing the Government to seize the land of citizens without permission.

This is 4th ammendment, if it's anything, not third.

The lobbying group for 3rd ammendment rights is too powerful for the government to trod on it: Third Amendment Rights Group Celebrates Another Successful Year

[allannis]

FYI - a "fair trial" isn't a bonus for the gilded American class of supreme humans. It's there because it's the best way a society has come up with to establish guilt. If you trust the government to know who is guilty without trial for some why not support it for yourself? Are you special and better than people from somewhere else? Stand for something!

This position of screw "them" if it makes me slightly safer is why Japanese Americans found themselves in camps. All of you know that was wrong but when it's your ass on the line you support similar policy? You know better.

How many Americans are being held at Gitmo?

[Burgold]

Yeah, I had to stretch a little to find one for the quartering act. I'm willing to be called wrong on this one.

---------- Post added July-16th-2011 at 12:59 PM ----------

The title of this thread should be changed, the word Republican should be changed to Congress ( on a side note this is a good example of how main stream media shows bias)

Possibly, except that the kernal of this thread came from what is going on in Florida with a side order of Arizona and Wisconsin. I didn't want to discount or short change all the Bill of Rights abuses that seem to be so rampant on the State level these days.

Again, whenever I put up a thread like this I actually hope to be proven wrong and showed that my cynical moment is misguided, but other than TB no one really seems to be arguing that. Most seem in agreement that our Bill or Rights are under siege. They just want it acknowledged that there are two armies marching against it.

[Destino]

How many Americans are being held at Gitmo?

How many innocent people are being held at Gitmo? Does that even factor it?

[allannis]

Yeah, I had to stretch a little to find one for the quartering act. I'm willing to be called wrong on this one.

---------- Post added July-16th-2011 at 12:59 PM ----------

Possibly, except that the kernal of this thread came from what is going on in Florida with a side order of Arizona and Wisconsin. I didn't want to discount or short change all the Bill of Rights abuses that seem to be so rampant on the State level these days.

Again, whenever I put up a thread like this I actually hope to be proven wrong and showed that my cynical moment is misguided, but other than TB no one really seems to be arguing that. Most seem in agreement that our Bill or Rights are under siege. They just want it acknowledged that there are two armies marching against it.

Sorry didn't mean to attack, I should have left out the side note. The two armies idea is why I thought there thread title should be changed.

[Burgold]

How many innocent people are being held at Gitmo? Does that even factor it?

The answer since they can be held there without charge or representation is that we don't know. We really have no idea how many or how few are held at Gitmo or at other "secret" prisons. As others have said, this is an area where Obama has failed the American people by continuing the policies of his predessor.

[deejaydana]

Burgold, you need to refocus your ire on both parties, they've been trashing the Constitution for decades now.

[Hitman21ST]

• First Amendment –

Let's also toss in the anti-Sharia law laws.

Sharia law isn't free speech. Sharia law is an attempt to make Muslims exempt from the law of the land. England adopted Sharia law and the Muslims don't care at all if they break British law, as long as it's covered by Sharia.

If Jews were to try to implement Hebrew law in the U.S., there would be an outcry to the ends of the earth.

[Burgold]

Sharia law isn't free speech. Sharia law is an attempt to make Muslims exempt from the law of the land. England adopted Sharia law and the Muslims don't care at all if they break British law, as long as it's covered by Sharia.

If Jews were to try to implement Hebrew law in the U.S., there would be an outcry to the ends of the earth.

I'm fairly hazy on the reality of this... My first thought is that there really isn't any significant attempt to start up Sharia law in this country. My second thought is that the movement against Sharia law is awful close to the Government trying to tell people what Religion they can or can't be and how to live.

The latter thought is why I think the moves against buildng mosques or banning Sharia law could be an attack on our Bill of Rights.

[Bang]

Sharia law isn't free speech. Sharia law is an attempt to make Muslims exempt from the law of the land. England adopted Sharia law and the Muslims don't care at all if they break British law, as long as it's covered by Sharia.

If Jews were to try to implement Hebrew law in the U.S., there would be an outcry to the ends of the earth.

Trying to implement something is hardly a threat.

The Communists have been running a candidate for president ever since Karl Marx was translated.

The American Communist party is alive and as well as it's ever been.

which is to say it exists, it tries to implement communism into our government, and it fails.

And it always has. We didnt need Joe McCarthy to save us from it. We save ourselves from it because it's not what we want. A few of 'us' want it, but so what? They lose. It is not a threat to us. It's there, but it has no chance. In all honesty, I bet it could have taken over the entire rest of the world in the 50s, and we STILL would not be communist.

Muslims are a very easy enemy to demonize and they fall very easily into the Republican fear agenda, and so people are concerned about Sharia law.

But not about communism, and both are about as likely to be implemented in America.

If you look at the last few hundred years, every despotic regime has a few things in common, and one of them is the fall guy group. Someone different. Someone that the despot can use to convince people that all of their problems are the fault of the fall guy group, and the fall guy group wants to destroy their way of life.

~Bang

[deejaydana]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I think the point he was trying to make are the far right parts and members/proponents of Sharia who want to set up camp and then say "you can't apply YOUR laws to what we believe" The distinction is the word "law" in this dialogue.

[Bang]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I think the point he was trying to make are the far right parts and members/proponents of Sharia who want to set up camp and then say "you can't apply YOUR laws to what we believe" The distinction is the word "law" in this dialogue.

Fair enough. I think our law would override the problem. I think some people may practice it secretly among themselves, but any violence or otherwise extroverted acts that break our existing law would be met with the same enforcement.

I don't think it's a problem that requires a lot of the hullaballoo it's being given. I think politicians are using it to ride a scapegoat into votes for themselves.

~Bang

[Burgold]

Again, I'm not very studied on this debate, but from the surface it seems like a really unsubtle attempt to diminish American Muslims and to paint them as potential evildoers bent on destroying America.

[techboy]

Again, whenever I put up a thread like this I actually hope to be proven wrong and showed that my cynical moment is misguided, but other than TB no one really seems to be arguing that.

You know I'm always happy to let you know when you're wrong or misguided.

It's kind of a full time job, though.

[Burgold]

You know I'm always happy to let you know when you're wrong or misguided.

It's kind of a full time job, though.

Hey, if only one person is needed for that job I'm doing pretty well. Most people require a small army to keep track and deal with all their silliness and error.

[Madison Redskin]

Both parties essentially represent themselves to the American public as the only party that can properly understand, interpret, and apply the U.S. Constitution. Both parties also support legislation that would likely shock the Founding Fathers and is struck down by the courts as unconstitutional. So, I am unwilling to claim that one party is the guardian of the U.S. Constitution and the other is intent on destroying it. In fact, I tend to cringe when politicians cite the Federalist Papers, the plain text of the U.S. Constitution, or obscure and incomplete quotes of the Founding Fathers.

Of course, I firmly believe the U.S. Constitution embodies sheer genius and I believe every American has a duty to try to understand it and oppose legislation that is, in his or her view, unconstitutional. However, I caution people to view those who wrap themselves in the cloak of "Constitutionalism" with a hearty dose of skepticism.

PS - Burgold, I hope you know this post is not directed at you.