|
|
#51
10-17-2007, 01:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] wtf? Do you actually believe that smoking is a right protected by the US Constitution? [/ QUOTE ] 9th amendment [/ QUOTE ] The 9th amendment ALLOWS for enactment of other rights not specifically set out by the constitution, it does not provide those rights in of itself. Try again. [/ QUOTE ] This is the biggest problem with people who don't understand the Bill of Rights. The government doesn't GIVE you rights, you have those rights to begin with; natural law or what have you. The Bill of Rights is to PREVENT government intervention in the listed topics. [/ QUOTE ] I (think I) understand this perfectly well. But people seem to be implying that we (as US residents) have rights to do as we please, and states can not take those rights away, for any reason. Please clarify. 
|
|
#52
10-17-2007, 01:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] wtf? Do you actually believe that smoking is a right protected by the US Constitution? [/ QUOTE ] 9th amendment [/ QUOTE ] The 9th amendment ALLOWS for enactment of other rights not specifically set out by the constitution, it does not provide those rights in of itself. Try again. [/ QUOTE ] This is the biggest problem with people who don't understand the Bill of Rights. The government doesn't GIVE you rights, you have those rights to begin with; natural law or what have you. The Bill of Rights is to PREVENT government intervention in the listed topics. [/ QUOTE ] I (think I) understand this perfectly well. But people seem to be implying that we (as US residents) have rights to do as we please, and states can not take those rights away, for any reason. Please clarify. [/ QUOTE ] Yep! Well, to clarify, they can infringe upon them but they cannot take them away.
|
|
#53
10-17-2007, 01:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It seems like if you could apply smoking to this you could apply it to just about anything. [/ QUOTE ] Yep! [/ QUOTE ] Why is there a law against walking around naked? Being publicly intoxicated? Not cleaning up dog waste? Those laws should not exist, due to the 9th amendment.
|
|
#54
10-17-2007, 01:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
I understand the 9th amendment to protect citizens from being denied fundamental rights simply because they were not enumerated in the constitution. But how is smoking a fundamental right protected by the 9th amendment? [/ QUOTE ] What is a "fundamental right" and where is it mentioned in the Constitution or BoR that "fundamental rights" are the only rights implied by the 9th amendment? [ QUOTE ] It seems like if you could apply smoking to this you could apply it to just about anything. [/ QUOTE ] I'd like to think so...
|
|
#55
10-17-2007, 11:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 1) 10th Amendment to the US constitution gives states the rights [/ QUOTE ] BZZZT. Wrong. Go read it again and start over. [/ QUOTE ] Deleted That's not how a debate works, sorry. If make a statement that is incorrect, you can't simply tell me I'm wrong, not tell me why, and ask me to prove the opposition myself. [/ QUOTE ] if YOU make a claim, it's YOUR job to get it right, not mine. The Constitution does not GRANT or GIVE *any* rights to *anyone*. And it NEVER mentions ANY RIGHTS that "states" or "governments" have - only PEOPLE have RIGHTS.
|
|
#56
10-17-2007, 11:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
On the 9th amendment, so put all the pieces together for me. How does the 9th amendment protect our "right to smoke"? I understand the 9th amendment to protect citizens from being denied fundamental rights simply because they were not enumerated in the constitution. But how is smoking a fundamental right protected by the 9th amendment? [/ QUOTE ] The 9th amendment does not protect a right to smoke, because there is no fundamental right to smoke! But the fact that I don't have a "fundamental right" to do something doesn't mean YOU have a right to STOP me from doing that. [ QUOTE ] It seems like if you could apply smoking to this you could apply it to just about anything. [/ QUOTE ] Yes.
|
|
#57
10-17-2007, 11:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It seems like if you could apply smoking to this you could apply it to just about anything. [/ QUOTE ] Yep! [/ QUOTE ] Why is there a law against walking around naked? Being publicly intoxicated? Not cleaning up dog waste? Those laws should not exist, due to the 9th amendment. [/ QUOTE ] I agree. PS: the constitution is not some infallible authority on what is and is not correct. This should be obvious since it has a built-in amendment process. Please stop with the appeal to the Constitution and instead examine actions on their own merits.
|
|
#58
10-18-2007, 11:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 1) 10th Amendment to the US constitution gives states the rights [/ QUOTE ] BZZZT. Wrong. Go read it again and start over. [/ QUOTE ] Deleted That's not how a debate works, sorry. If make a statement that is incorrect, you can't simply tell me I'm wrong, not tell me why, and ask me to prove the opposition myself. [/ QUOTE ] if YOU make a claim, it's YOUR job to get it right, not mine. The Constitution does not GRANT or GIVE *any* rights to *anyone*. [/ QUOTE ] This is a complete falsity that has been repeated often on this forum. Tell me which of these rights you would have without the Constitutional provisions granting them: *The right to not have troups quartered in your house *The right to a warrant based on probable cause before your person, house, papers, or effects can be searched *The right to a grand jury indictment before prosecution for a federal crime *The right to not be compelled to testify against yourself *The right to not be tried twice for the same crime *The right to a jury trial *The right to a speedy trial *The right to a public trial *The right to obtain counsel in your defense *The right to a jury trial in civil cases valued over $20 *The right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment *The right to be free from excessive bail requirements *The right to be a citizen of this country if you are born here
|
|
#59
10-18-2007, 12:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The Constitution does not GRANT or GIVE *any* rights to *anyone*. [/ QUOTE ] This is a complete falsity that has been repeated often on this forum. Tell me which of these rights you would have without the Constitutional provisions granting them: *The right to not have troups quartered in your house [/ QUOTE ] This isn't a right. And the constitution doesn't claim it is. And it doesn't grant it. It just says the government can't violate your (pre-existing!) property rights in this particular manner. [ QUOTE ] *The right to a warrant based on probable cause before your person, house, papers, or effects can be searched [/ QUOTE ] Again, try reading. The 4th amendment says your property rights "shall not be violated," it doesn't GRANT or create the right. [ QUOTE ] *The right to a grand jury indictment before prosecution for a federal crime *The right to not be compelled to testify against yourself *The right to not be tried twice for the same crime *The right to a jury trial *The right to a speedy trial *The right to a public trial *The right to a jury trial in civil cases valued over $20 [/ QUOTE ] These aren't "rights" in any meaningful sense - they're more along the lines of comforts the government promises. Like a cigarette before your execution. I guess you could make a case for "creation" of these rights. Like you would be creating a "right" by allowing a prisoner the "right" to choose between an orange jumpsuit and a blue one. But again, the wording indicates that these types of things are actually pre-existing rights: "In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved" Not granted. [ QUOTE ] *The right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment [/ QUOTE ] LOL. This is a LIMITATION on GOVERNMENT POWER, not a grant of a right. etc. Short answer: humans have all of those rights regardless of what some piece of paper says. And from another viewpoint, they have none of those rights, because they aren't rights. If you think the constitution actually GRANTS those rights, please quote the relevant passages and explain.
|
|
#60
10-18-2007, 12:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
Thank raptor jesus that the government is there to decide what is and isn't safe for me to do
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
