Amendments to the Constitution of the United States should serve to clarify the responsibilities of the government, not the rights of citizens.
Furthermore, when contemplating any Amendment remember those words we have used again and again to right the most egregious of our historical wrongs:
" The right of citizens of the United States [...insert right denied to some by historical injustice...] shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state . . . "Posted by Martial
Why?
Posted by: house9 on August 6, 2003 09:24 AMA quick response now, but with the expectation of a more thorough one later.
Constitutions describe governing structures and should be limited to this description. Governments are tools which people design in order to achieve certain purposes. In the case of the United States, those purposes are suggested by the Preamble to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
Rights, by contrast, are inherent in individuals; they are not granted by governments. In as much as rights are mentioned in Constitutions, it should be to remind legislators and the executive of the limits upon their powers.
The Ninth Amendment sums this up quite well, I think:
" The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. "Posted by: Martial on August 6, 2003 11:54 AM
Have to disagree with this - it's a nice philosophical position to say that rights inhere in individuals, but there has to be institutions protecting those rights in the context of a state. This is why we have the Bill of Rights - without it the government would have too much freedom to carry out its responsibilities. It may be aesthetically offensive that a document "gives us rights", but the document represents (brings into being, actually) institutions that guarantee them.
Posted by: paul on August 12, 2003 10:10 AM