Something to Ponder

[Bonny]

Wombat, What is wrong with our bill of rights? Just because we have lost a good part of our freedoms & our phony elected officials are busy taking more of them away from us?

[wombat2u2004]

Wombat, What is wrong with our bill of rights? Just because we have lost a good part of our freedoms & our phony elected officials are busy taking more of them away from us?

Your freedoms are too open to abuse.

[Puckstop31]

Your freedoms are too open to abuse.

I agree... In a sense. That is the reality of the world.

But a vast, vast majority of people are law abiding and exercise our God given and Bill of Rights confirmed rights. Our Bill of Rights does not GRANT any rights. It simply confirms Natural Law. You can torch the paper all you want. You can have European/Australian 'limits' on self defence, speech, press etc... That does not change my fundamental right to free speech, self defence, etc...


See, who gets to define "abuse"? You? The government? Society?

Also, are you saying you would rather be 'safe' than free?

[wombat2u2004]

I agree... In a sense. That is the reality of the world.

But a vast, vast majority of people are law abiding and exercise our God given and Bill of Rights confirmed rights. Our Bill of Rights does not GRANT any rights. It simply confirms Natural Law. You can torch the paper all you want. You can have European/Australian 'limits' on self defence, speech, press etc... That does not change my fundamental right to free speech, self defence, etc...


See, who gets to define "abuse"? You? The government? Society?

Also, are you saying you would rather be 'safe' than free?

There has to be a limit to "freedoms". Duties of people are just as important as their rights.
I'm very happy to live under a system which doesn't have a Bill of Rights. I can't speak for Europeans, but I can certainly speak on behalf of Australians.
I believe that the majority of Aussies would prefer that to. Freedoms here are assumed, they have no need to be stated in some document, and we don't have the problems that such a document brings. There have been a number of times here that proponents of a Bill of Rights have tried to introduce that document, but it has failed every time.

Also, are you saying you would rather be 'safe' than free? No, I'm not saying that, in my opinion I'd rather have both, and I already do.....again without the problems of a Bill of Rights.

In Australia, where parliamentary democracy usually works reasonably well, we can trust the legislators. If they do not act justly, particularly if they act oppressively, they will be dismissed from office at the next election. This is how our democracy works.

A Bill of Rights here would, as in the United States, politicize the Courts. It would amount to, or produce, a form of judicial imperialism. It would transfer great power from the elected representatives of the people in all their variety, to the judges. But the judges are unelected.

A Bill of Rights entrenches attitudes to rights which become out of date with changing times. I have stated that in all threads on this subject that I have posted on. Any Bill of Rights drawn today would soon be out of date.

"See, who gets to define "abuse"? You? The government? Society?"
We all do.
Isn't that exactly where your Madison was coming from ??? He was reluctant to draft a Bill of rights in the first place.........who defines the rights of the people ??? Him ???

[Lady's Human]

The bill of rights doesn't empower individuals, rather it limits the power of government.

Key difference? You trust your legislature.

We don't.

[Lady's Human]

BTW, it was a JOKE!

Humor! (though the stats are straight from the FBI............)

[Bonny]

Might as well bring in the lawyer he can stick up for he doctor & help him bury his mistakes.

[wombat2u2004]

The bill of rights doesn't empower individuals, rather it limits the power of government.

Key difference? You trust your legislature.

We don't.

Fair enough.
Everything here has worked fine so far, so we are ok with what we have.