They would have elaborated on or changed some things in the bill of rights?
2007-03-23 09:49:52 · 7 answers · asked by NO SOUP 4 U! 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
They'd be shaking their heads at some of the interpretations that have taken place.
I think they definitely would have spent the time to further define their meaning, and eliminate as many ambiguities as possible.
2007-03-23 09:59:34 · answer #1 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They did see the future! They kept it short and sweet and to the point. They knew that things and people were going to change and that only the very basic kernal of law is needed to help us remember what is the most important in any situation. Freedom, ownership of land, protection of home and harth, the right to goveren ourselves, speak freely with out fear, and the right to presue happiness. I beleive that this bill of rights for the people should be preserved at all costs!
2007-03-23 17:11:00 · answer #2 · answered by KJLV 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure that would have expected witchcraft (the term then) to be included in freedom of religion, or striptease to be be included in freedom of speech.
Never mind the latest, that a law aiming to stop porn reaching children on the internet infringes free-speech rights.
2007-03-23 17:02:07 · answer #3 · answered by Pedestal 42 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think they would have put an asterisks and underlined a few phrases as important to keep in mind.
2007-03-23 17:04:02 · answer #4 · answered by pip 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
would not have mattered. the aclu has watered down the constitution so much that a police officer can be sued for saving your life if he prevents you from committing suicide. they would have dumped a lump.
2007-03-23 16:55:10 · answer #5 · answered by BRYAN H 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I think they would have shot themselves !
2007-03-23 20:42:07 · answer #6 · answered by bobbi123 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They would have said...THis is what we mean, not what you think it is suppose to mean!
2007-03-23 16:54:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋