Is it that "We the People" actually referred to somebody other than American Citizens? And that the Bill of Rights was just drafted as a lofty set of fictitious guidelines just to be seen merely as a premise so the ignorant masses could grow up believing that there was an actual place that existed called America where this premise was real?
2006-12-19 13:37:47 · 20 answers · asked by Deciple 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Because treason has a very narrow definition under the Constitution that only applies to making war against the country or aiding an enemy in a time of war. As bad as you may consider the PATRIOT Act, it is not an act of war.
2006-12-19 14:02:27 · answer #1 · answered by Michael C 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem with this country is we are too blind to see what is right in front of our faces or to busy to care. Many people haven't taken the time to sit down and READ the patriot act to even know what it contains. Now, I do agree with the fact that during a time of war, some rights should be negated for the better good of the country. However, I feel that the Patriot Act goes beyond what is necessary and strips us of our hard-earned rights. We no longer have the right to privacy; everything from your bank accounts to your phone can and probably is being monitored to make sure you aren't a terrorist.
Another thing that irks me about post-9/11 security is the airports. My husband, who is a United States soldier, was hopping a plane back to Iraq at the end of a two week leave. He and another soldier, dressed in ACU's, boots, and carrying their Army issue bags, were stopped, asked to take off their boots, empty their pockets, so forth and so on. They both presented DoD Identification, yet they were subjected to a search. It's enough to make one wonder what they are fighting for...
2006-12-19 22:02:01 · answer #2 · answered by his_lil_patriot 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its called wartime powers. But you are right President has exceeded the powers of the presidency. His signing statement on the Patriot Act changed the intent of the law as written by Congress.as ruled by the Supreme Court. That part of the law was rewritten as well as the bill on torture,and there are those that believe they will be challenge. As annoying as the ACLU is they had a part in those challanges. The ACLU is good, problem is with some of the people that make up the organization. Like many politicians, the ACLU needs to clean up its act.
2006-12-19 21:53:41 · answer #3 · answered by longroad 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, the people who wrote the patriot act were your congressmen. Worked on in various committees and they all wanted it ramrodded through because they wanted to look patriotic after the disaster of 9/11. A significant amount of blame with all that is going on regarding the patriot act falls on congress, as my poli-sci professor would say, "We have a congress, at least, we used to, they haven't really done anything in the last decade."
2006-12-19 21:43:36 · answer #4 · answered by Fred K 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
U answered the question. Slavery was recognized in that instrument you speak of. The Constitution was in large measure a an ambiguous compromise of ideals - the drafters no doubt recognized this. In fact, one can argue that Zodiac "predictions" and the Constitution "work" similarly - one resolves inherent ambiguity in their content in a selfish fashion.. Judges interpret that ambiguous document to fit their agenda - just like hopeful souls may "read" meaningful and self-serving content into a vague prediction that they will "find new hope" ....
2006-12-19 22:06:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We the people refers to Americans. In time of war, and yes, after 911, it is a war, certain rights have to be waved. If you really look at it, we havnt lost really one right, just an issue with airports. Hey, the world is a hars place. Look at world war two and the rights given up by the people. Rationing, bond drives, meatless days and such.
If this country is so bad, and you dislike it so much, Move!!! One person over 50% elected Bush as the President and that is all that matters. I am glad, after serving in Nam, that we have a President with guts and desire to do right and not let Congress try to run the war like they did Nam and got 54,000 Americans Killed or Missing In Action.
If you don't want to give up your rights, move to Canada, so far, the terrorists haven't lined up with them in their sites. they after us, the " Great Satan" and want to kill us off, to include you, unless your a Muslim in drag.
2006-12-19 21:44:58 · answer #6 · answered by bigmikejones 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He's defending the Constitution with the Patriot Act by defending the country. That's the whole point of defending the Constitution. Otherwise, he'd just be defending a musty old piece of paper.
2006-12-19 21:40:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
The act was passed by both houses of Congress, signed by the President, and has survived court challenges. Do you propose that all three branches are in collusion to violate the Constitution?
2006-12-19 21:41:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
In times of "War", people (Congress) get all wrapped up in the fever of the moment. Congress has always had a hard time to admit a mistake has taken place. I don't believe Congree has EVER admitted to an error. It is neccessary to blame others so they can be re-elected. It's all politics.
Ofcourse the Patriot Act is unconstitutional.
Now get a lawmaker to correct it.
2006-12-19 21:46:58 · answer #9 · answered by tennacious_c 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Ol' Dude really is walkin' the line with that one.
P.S. Hi Al! Big fan.
2006-12-19 21:46:01 · answer #10 · answered by Ricky J. 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋