I'll give you a hint.... It doesn't!
The Ninth Amendment, or Amendment IX of the United States Constitution is the section of the Bill of Rights that states that there are other rights that may exist aside from the ones explicitly mentioned, and even though they are not listed, it does not mean they can be violated. The Ninth Amendment of the Bill of Rights was put into the United States Constitution on September 5, 1789 and was voted for by 9 out of 12 states on December 15, 1791.
The text of the Ninth Amendment is very short and states the following:
“The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Ninth Amendment - US Constitution | LAWS.com
This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."
That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.
It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
The Constitution doesn’t mention any specific religion or even God. In the beginning of the country, they didn’t even give out marriage certificates by government entities of the newly formed US government. And yes, I know abortion existed before the Constitution. Doesn’t mean the Constitution said it should be legal across the country.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BTW, I NEVER said you haven’t read it. I said I doubt you read much of it. I read the whole thing. Do you even know why the Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution? Why do you think they opposed monarchies, as well as democracies? Yes, America is NOT a democracy!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, I go by it’s original intent.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Neither did it say it should be illegal.
And whatever the Constitution says or doesn't say is up to the SCOTUS to decide.
This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."
That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.
It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
Who is it up to?
The SCOTUS as in the Supreme Court of the United States.
This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."
That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.
It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
No, I go by it’s original intent.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But why? Do you think those guys in the powdered wigs knew everything? They didn’t even agree with each other.
One of their major disagreements were about just which powder was best powdering the wigs. That's why it never ended up in the Constitution.
By the way, if you mention the Civil War, that’s why we have the AMENDMENT PROCESS. If you want “abortion” and “marriage” in the Constitution, AMEND the Constitution damn it!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have no idea what its original intent was. Nor could you possibly come up with even one good reason as to why anyone would go with the original intent. Unless of course it is to say that your forefathers have done all your thinking for you so obviously you see no need to try thinking for yourself
Three-fifths compromise | History, Slavery, & Significance | BritannicaThree-fifths compromise, compromise agreement between delegates from the Northern and the Southern states at the United States Constitutional Convention (1787) that three-fifths of the slave population would be counted for determining direct taxation and representation in the House of Representatives.
I'll give you a hint.... It doesn't!
I'll give you a hint.... It doesn't!
As I have explained previously, just because you have read the words doesn't mean that you understand the ideas. You should start with reading the Articles of Confederation and then the Federalist papers that formed many of the arguments of the Constitutional Congress. The US Constitution is not to be read as a literal list of rights. We would have no freedom if that were the case, but it is not.
We dont not have to ask the government for permission before we act. We can act as we choose until there is a compelling reason or state interest for the government to say that we cannot act in that manner. You want to turn that core idea of freedom on its head and say that we have the right to act only as they permit us. You must be a fascist.
I like Howard Zinn and Chomsky.
probably enamored with the 3/5 compromise of the original document:
Three-fifths compromise | History, Slavery, & Significance | Britannica
Constitution doesn’t mention the Air Force either.
Most states had not banned abortion. It was legal in many states, except Texas and a few other conservative states. That is why Roe because the test case. If you dont like abortion then don't have one but you cannot tell others what they can and cannot do with their bodies because of your religious beliefs.
What Getting An Abortion Was Like In The '60s, '70s, And '80's Compared To Now
great, then you understand why abortion can not be banned by the government, and you also understand why same sex marriage, interracial marriage etc can not be banned by the government.I’ve read the Constitution! Have you?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Don't need to amend it. Both are already covered. 4th amendment, and 14th amendment.By the way, if you mention the Civil War, that’s why we have the AMENDMENT PROCESS. If you want “abortion” and “marriage” in the Constitution, AMEND the Constitution damn it!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Don't need to amend it. Both are already covered. 4th amendment, and 14th amendment.
Read the 5th Amendment and also read the 14th Amendment AGAIN. "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Apparently all human beings are supposed to be equally protected.
uh, because the Constitution provides a mechanism for a representative Congress to effect laws on behalf of the nation as deemed necessary and/or appropriate
thought you might have recognized that significant aspect while you were reading the entirety of the US Constitution
You do realize that the 3/5ths clause had to do with representation, not slavery. Geez.