• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?[W:135]

Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Wrong about what?

its clear, the library of congress says Madison wrote the bill of rights amendments, and you say its not so....so you have proclaimed the library of congress to be wrong.
 
Last edited:
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

its clear, the library of congress says Madison wrote the bill of rights amendments, and you say its not so....so you have proclaimed the library of congress to be wrong.

The Library of Congress is a building. And what exactly do you think this building said?
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

its clear, the library of congress says Madison wrote the bill of rights amendments, and you say its not so....so you have proclaimed the library of congress to be wrong.

MO, the Library of Congress is a national repository. It has a collection of more than 162 million items includes more than 38.6 million cataloged books and other print materials in 470 languages; more than 70 million manuscripts; the largest rare book collection in North America; and the world's largest collection of legal materials, films, maps, sheet music and sound recordings. It holds the most historical information about America and the most current. The chronicles of everything our government does is recorded and stored, even some in real time.

https://www.loc.gov/about/general-information/

So I'm not sure what you mean about somebody proclaiming that Library of Congress is wrong. Perhaps you're actually saying that historical documents found in the Library of Congress shows a different historical perspective regarding the creation and implementation of the Bill of Rights in the US. That would require an individual researching those historical documents and linking to some source that proves a point or perspective. Have you personally researched this topic? And better yet can you link us to some historical document that allows us to read what you've researched.

Actually Madison's adopted version of the Bill of Rights wasn't created from original thought. It was a compilation of rights constructed in Europe over several hundred years that most educated Framers closely studied. Many Framers knew first-hand of the various ways European monarchies cruelly and unjustly treated people using the excuse that they were divinely appointed and guided to do whatever the hell they wanted to people. So their input was important to the process of creating our particular Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights was mostly drawn from concepts that came from the Magna Carta 1215 up to England's Bill of Rights established in 1689. And actually a tad bit from the French Bill of Rights which its final draft was pass in 1789, the same year our Bill of Rights were passed. But we had several Framers who had very close ties to France, including Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. They spent a lot of time in France so they were personally familiar with the drafts in process before France passed their own version.

George Mason of Virginia was really the fundamental drafter of the earliest known version of the Bill of Rights for his state, which was considered to be the beginning framework behind the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights. And again, even George Mason's version was not of his own original thought, but from historical documents that were created in Europe.

James Madison's "draft" was adopted, but its contents was far from his own ideas and words. His draft was a modified version of numerous Bills of Rights that came before the Framers during their attempts to establish our nation, its Constitution, and Bill of Rights.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

MO, the Library of Congress is a national repository. It has a collection of more than 162 million items includes more than 38.6 million cataloged books and other print materials in 470 languages; more than 70 million manuscripts; the largest rare book collection in North America; and the world's largest collection of legal materials, films, maps, sheet music and sound recordings. It holds the most historical information about America and the most current. The chronicles of everything our government does is recorded and stored, even some in real time.

https://www.loc.gov/about/general-information/

So I'm not sure what you mean about somebody proclaiming that Library of Congress is wrong. Perhaps you're actually saying that historical documents found in the Library of Congress shows a different historical perspective regarding the creation and implementation of the Bill of Rights in the US. That would require an individual researching those historical documents and linking to some source that proves a point or perspective. Have you personally researched this topic? And better yet can you link us to some historical document that allows us to read what you've researched.

Actually Madison's adopted version of the Bill of Rights wasn't created from original thought. It was a compilation of rights constructed in Europe over several hundred years that most educated Framers closely studied. Many Framers knew first-hand of the various ways European monarchies cruelly and unjustly treated people using the excuse that they were divinely appointed and guided to do whatever the hell they wanted to people. So their input was important to the process of creating our particular Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights was mostly drawn from concepts that came from the Magna Carta 1215 up to England's Bill of Rights established in 1689. And actually a tad bit from the French Bill of Rights which its final draft was pass in 1789, the same year our Bill of Rights were passed. But we had several Framers who had very close ties to France, including Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. They spent a lot of time in France so they were personally familiar with the drafts in process before France passed their own version.

George Mason of Virginia was really the fundamental drafter of the earliest known version of the Bill of Rights for his state, which was considered to be the beginning framework behind the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights. And again, even George Mason's version was not of his own original thought, but from historical documents that were created in Europe.

James Madison's "draft" was adopted, but its contents was far from his own ideas and words. His draft was a modified version of numerous Bills of Rights that came before the Framers during their attempts to establish our nation, its Constitution, and Bill of Rights.


Haymarket claims Madison did not write the amendments to the bill of rights, that a committee had done it.

And all these years I thought it was written by committee but now we are told it was the work of just one man. AMAZING!!!!!

even though the website to the library of congress states Madison's amendments, which would be from his june 8th speech of the house

the senate did edit some of Madison's amendments, but the foundation which Madison laid was the only one used

https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/billofrights.html
 
Last edited:
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Haymarket claims Madison did not write the amendments to the bill of rights, that a committee had done it.



even though the website to the library of congress states Madison's amendments, which would be from his june 8th speech of the house

the senate did edit some of Madison's amendments, but the foundation which Madison laid was the only one used

https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/billofrights.html

Well, again, Madison's version wasn't created out of his original thought, concepts, or ideas. I would credit George Mason and Virginia as having the root construct as to what would developed into and later submitted by Madison as the version to be adopted to add to the Constitution. My previous post explains a general picture of how our Bill of Rights came into being. The Bill of Rights was a modified version of the Magna Carta, England's Bill of Rights 1689 and other historical documents where people revolted in Europe, forcing their respective Monarchies or governments to recognize the rights of the citizens.

In other words, James Madison wasn't the sole creator our of Bill of Rights, and technically far from it.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Well, again, Madison's version wasn't created out of his original thought, concepts, or ideas. I would credit George Mason and Virginia as having the root construct as to what would developed into and later submitted by Madison as the version to be adopted to add to the Constitution. My previous post explains a general picture of how our Bill of Rights came into being. The Bill of Rights was a modified version of the Magna Carta, England's Bill of Rights 1689 and other historical documents where people revolted in Europe, forcing their respective Monarchies or governments to recognize the rights of the citizens.

In other words, James Madison wasn't the sole creator our of Bill of Rights, and technically far from it.



yes i understand that,and where your line of reasoning is, but i am not arguing that point, Haymarket is arguing that as a deflection of what i have said.

Madison drew from proposals submitted by conventions [i already stated this in another post] and from Virginia rights.

what i have said is Madison wrote them, and submitted them to congress where they where sightly tweaked by the house, and then on to the senate where some were edited.

what Haymarket is seeking to do is minimize James Madison , by saying he is just one of the bunch of congress and he played no more a role then anyone else in congress, which is not true.

by seeking to minimize Madison, he wants to disavow what Madison says about the preamble of bill of rights concerning its amendments, as if what Madison statements concerning the bill for rights is only opinion, and means nothing as compared to john q. public

Haymarket has already worked to try to minimize the preamble to the bill of rights, as if it is nothing to the amendments themselves, that it has no meaning.

his work to minimize is a clever attempt, however its easy to see what he is doing.
 
Last edited:
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

yes i understand that,and where your line of reasoning is, but i am not arguing that point, Haymarket is arguing that as a deflection of what i have said.

Madison drew from proposals submitted by conventions [i already stated this in another post] and from Virginia rights.

what i have said is Madison wrote them, and submitted them to congress where they where sightly tweaked by the house, and then on to the senate where some were edited.

what Haymarket is seeking to do is minimize James Madison , by saying he is just one of the bunch of congress and he played no more a role then anyone else in congress, which is not true.

by seeking to minimize Madison, he wants to disavow what Madison says about the preamble of bill of rights concerning its amendments, as if what Madison statements concerning the bill for rights is only opinion, and means nothing as compared to john q. public

Haymarket has already worked to try to minimize the preamble to the bill of rights, as if it is nothing to the amendments themselves, that it has no meaning.

his work to minimize is a clever attempt, however its easy to see what he is doing.

Ah...gotcha. Guess that's something that'll have to be worked out between you guys.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Minimisation (psychology)


Minimisation is a type of deception[1] involving denial coupled with rationalisation in situations where complete denial is implausible. It is the opposite of exaggeration.
Minimization—downplaying the significance of an event or emotion—is a common strategy in dealing with feelings of guilt.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

YOu made the same similar mistake that i made.
this is the pre-amble to the bill of rights. it does exist but they don't teach it in hstory class.
a link to it has been posted several times in this thread already.

Thank you for making that fine point.

Having now read the preamble in the original post here, it seems quite trivial, just a statement of purpose more than anything.

I learn something new every day.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Thank you for making that fine point.

Having now read the preamble in the original post here, it seems quite trivial, just a statement of purpose more than anything.

I learn something new every day.

its a introduction statement thats all, and it states the clauses of the bill of rights are declaratory and restrictive to the federal government.

james Madison report of 1800 - In pursuance of the wishes thus expressed, the first Congress that assembled under the Constitution proposed certain amendments, which have since, by the necessary ratifications, been made a part of it; among which amendments is the article containing, among other prohibitions on the Congress, an express declaration that they should make no law abridging the freedom of the press.


The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstructions 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 insure the beneficent ends of its institutions."

Here is the most satisfactory and authentic proof that the several amendments proposed were to be considered as either declaratory or restrictive, and, whether the one or the other as corresponding with the desire expressed by a number of the States, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government.
 
Last edited:
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

still want to deny the website for the library of congress?

yes, i know you don't know what to do now, so you are in denial mode......but its your own fault.

Not denying anything - simply asking who said that. Why are you impotent to say so?
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

what Haymarket is seeking to do is minimize James Madison , by saying he is just one of the bunch of congress and he played no more a role then anyone else in congress, which is not true.

No ... that is a falsehood and I said just the opposite b my 167

Madison played a role - even a large role - but he is not the author in that others also contributed as well as he..
emphasis added

Please stop lying about my position on this. Doings only serves to undermine your own credibility.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Thank you for making that fine point.

Having now read the preamble in the original post here, it seems quite trivial, just a statement of purpose more than anything.

I learn something new every day.

Yet it shows intent behind the BOR's which in law is very important.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Thank you for making that fine point.

Having now read the preamble in the original post here, it seems quite trivial, just a statement of purpose more than anything.

I learn something new every day.

your statement is correct in that it states what the clauses are/ their purpose
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

No ... that is a falsehood and I said just the opposite b my 167


emphasis added

Please stop lying about my position on this. Doings only serves to undermine your own credibility.

i know your position:mrgreen:
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

i know your position:mrgreen:

Apparently not since you lied about it and I proved it with my quote which was nothing what you claimed.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Apparently not since you lied about it and I proved it with my quote which was nothing what you claimed.

what is the purpose of the preamble to the bill of rights, what does it convey?

what did Madison mean when he states amendments were made to the constitution, and it prohibits congress from making any law?

can you give us insight to these questions?
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

what is the purpose of the preamble to the bill of rights, what does it convey?

what did Madison mean when he states amendments were made to the constitution, and it prohibits congress from making any law?


The preamble to the bill of rights serves no legal purpose as it is NOT part of the Constitution nor would it have changed anything if it was part.

As to what Madison meant- I am not sure he said what you ascribed to him - and in any case its just one mans opinion speaking as a citizen in no official capacity whatsoever.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

The preamble to the bill of rights serves no legal purpose as it is NOT part of the Constitution nor would it have changed anything if it was part.


i did not ask THAT!..I asked what is the purpose of the preamble to the bill of rights, what does it convey since it is not law

As to what Madison meant- I am not sure he said what you ascribed to him - and in any case its just one mans opinion speaking as a citizen in no official capacity whatsoever.

so there is no miscommunication what is madsioning say here in the whole sentence below


In pursuance of the wishes thus expressed, the first Congress that assembled under the Constitution proposed certain amendments, which have since, by the necessary ratifications, been made a part of it; among which amendments is the article containing, among other prohibitions on the Congress, an express declaration that they should make no law abridging the freedom of the press.
 
Last edited:
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

so there is no miscommunication what is madsioning say here in the whole sentence below


In pursuance of the wishes thus expressed, the first Congress that assembled under the Constitution proposed certain amendments, which have since, by the necessary ratifications, been made a part of it; among which amendments is the article containing, among other prohibitions on the Congress, an express declaration that they should make no law abridging the freedom of the press.

Thank you for your opinion and interpretation of the opinion and interpretation of another citizen over two centuries ago.
 
Re: Preamble to Bil of Rights part of the Constitution?

Thank you for your opinion and interpretation of the opinion and interpretation of another citizen over two centuries ago.

i am simply asking you, .....what does the sentence mean below

In pursuance of the wishes thus expressed, the first Congress that assembled under the Constitution proposed certain amendments, which have since, by the necessary ratifications, been made a part of it; among which amendments is the article containing, among other prohibitions on the Congress, an express declaration that they should make no law abridging the freedom of the press.
 
Back
Top Bottom