Libs "Bill of Rights" or is that Frights?

Question

Sample: Artical 1 - A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be permitted.
Here is your chance libs to re-write history again.

Artical 2 - Congress shall make no law permitting religion, or the free exercise thereof (except if the religion is practiced by people who scare us); or abridging the freedom of speech (unless we don't agree with it), or of the press (so long as they're on our side); or the right of the people peaceably to assemble (but then violent mobs are okay, as long as they're illegal aliens and/or people who scare us), and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances (illegal combatant terrorists have all the rights of a native-born US citizen-everybody knows that).

Articak 3 - No Soldier shall, in time of peace, be respected, nor in time of war, (unless a Democrat is Commander-in-Chief, or said Soldier is himself a Democrat). (And even then it's iffy.)

Artical 4 - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses (except when the Supreme Court says otherwise), papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation (by a Carter or Clinton appointee), and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime (i.e. perjury), unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger (in which case we can assert the commission of deeds by our troops, whether charged or not); nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life (under any circumstances, unless he can be classified a right-winger), liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation (except when the Supreme Court decides otherwise). (And those convicted of offenses who are Big-Business types such as Ken Lay SHALL NOT die until twenty years after commencing their sentence!!)

Answer 1

frighting what the liberals plan on doing to our country.

Answer 2

What Thomas Jefferson would be most amazed at is not the republicans protecting that right...but there inability to use that right against a tyrannical leader!
And why are republicans the only party to have a leader with such a disdain for the constitution with a record 800 signing ceremonies?
You don't have a leg to stand on!
Your party hates the constitution and we Americans are sick of it!

Answer 3

You know what??? I am so sick of phony "questions" like this on Answers that I am almost ready to quit logging in here. Liberals have no "Bill of Rights" other than those given by our founding fathers. I find it strange that I, as a liberal, am more concerned ab out freedoms than the present followers of Dubya, supossedly conservative, who find it perfectly alright to give up many of our freedoms under the umbrella of national "securiity". I guess being free to shoot each other on a whim is much more important than being able to have a private conversation with a friend.

Answer 4

Like the colonies did when the British sent thousands of troops to kill them, if your government goes wacky, should the town get together to protect itself? Figure it out. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are gifts to the world. Protect them.

Answer 5

Where in this do you see any liberalism. From Wikipedia: Liberalism is an ideology, philosophical view, and political tradition which holds that liberty is the primary political value.[1] Liberalism has its roots in the Western Enlightenment, but the term now encompasses a diversity of political thought.

Broadly speaking, contemporary liberalism emphasizes individual rights. It seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, especially of government and religion, the rule of law, free public education, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy that supports relatively free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected. [2] In modern society, liberals favor a liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law and an equal opportunity to succeed[3].

Many liberals advocate a greater degree of government interference in the free market, often in the form of anti-discrimination laws, civil service examinations, universal education, and progressive taxation. This philosophy frequently extends to a belief that the government should provide for a degree of general welfare, including benefits for the unemployed, housing for the homeless, and medical care for the sick. Such publicly-funded initiatives and interferences in the market are rejected by modern advocates of classical liberalism, which emphasizes free private enterprise, individual property rights and freedom of contract; classical liberals hold that economic inequality, as arising naturally from competition in the free market, does not justify the violation of private property rights. However, modern advocates of classical liberalism do advocate a heavier taxation on the corporation, as opposed to the current trend of the burden of income tax resting on the shoulders of the individual worker, as did the early classical liberals.

Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support include the right to life, liberty, and property. Liberalism has its roots in the Western Enlightenment, but the term now encompasses a diversity of political thought, with adherents spanning a large part of the political spectrum.

A broader use of the term liberalism is in the context of liberal democracy (see also constitutionalism). In this sense of the word, it refers to a democracy in which the powers of government are limited and the rights of citizens are legally defined; this applies to nearly all Western democracies, and therefore is not solely associated with liberal parties.

Answer 6

very good question, the "libs" are scared they want liberal judges to rule on the law according to their beliefs and so far they have suceeded. That is the true downfall of America

Answer 7

this isnt really a question your just spinning up a fire, which i guess is okay cause what i wrote to you isnt an answer.

Answer 8

This coming from the side that brought us the Patriot Act.

Answer 9

Who wrote all that nonsense?
It's apparent that you really have the wrong idea about liberals, as most conservatives do.

Answer 10

You been working on that all night? Shameful waste of electrons.