What are the opposing view points in regard to the debate over the Bill of Rights?

Answer 1

what you are asking was a debate that occurred during the early debating period when the framers of the constitution waged war against some who were against the constitution.
what history has since recorded we know of now as the "federalist papers" these are actual debates between the founding fathers; for and against this constitution.
the primary debate that waged on was individual rights vs. a strong central government.
some founding fathers the so-called Anti-federalists argued the reason for fighting the revolution was to throw out one king; this constitution would allow another king to sit on the throne. the federalists saw a purpose for a strong centralized government and as a compromise created our bicameral legislature; senate and house of representatives. the argument that the president would be too powerful was compromised by our three chambers of government; legislative, judicial, and executive.
some federalists and anti-federalists did not like the idea of a bill of rights because they felt it was unnecessary. the idea of writing down and "enumerating" all the "natural rights" of man seemed ridiculous. they also argued that "enumerating" the bill of rights would imply to constrict; in other words, would in essence safeguard some rights not others; how do you enumerate all the rights of man? you can't, therefore, why have a bill of rights? most against the bill of rights wanted to uphold the british system of "common law." where everyone's individual freedoms were accounted for and understood but never mentioned.
the inability to enumerate all the freedoms that the bill of rights could have given was compromised by the use of the 9th amendment; where, an individual can claim all the rights of the natural man whether they are included in this constitution or not.

Answer 2

What debate?
The Bill of
Rights is NOT debatable. it is the LAW of the land!
Anyone wanting to change it should NOT be allowed to hold political office.
They could not take the Oath of Office. It asks them swear to uphold the Constitution!

Answer 3

Did absolutely everyone see the action picture, "An Inconvenient actuality"? Then please tell me precisely what evidence Al Gore provided. to start with Al isn't a scientist and has no scientific history, all I ever heard him say became into "a chum of mine pronounced, blah,blah blah" and then he throws up his little chart to coach the upward thrust of carbon dioxide interior the air, the factor of the biggest iceberg that became into shown melting is actual growing to be. right this is the actual project, 25% of the Scientists have self belief that there is international Warming, seventy 5% disagree or haven't any opinion the two way. The media in uncomplicated terms declares the minority (human beings that say that's actual). Now i understand that all and sundry the liberals would desire to have a jackass to maintain on with so as that they picked Al Gore and then the all hold forth stop international WARMING, the reality of the project is that we would desire to do is stop international WHINING!! in case you liberals want international warming to be actual, tell your congressmen and ladies human beings to NUKE IRAN NOW, that would desire to enhance the temperature in that section upwards of a hundred seventy five,000 stages. Edit: be conscious to Raoul Duke: that's time for me to take a CRAP!! humorous, I even have by no potential heard any scientist say that they seem to be a climate substitute scientist, they could say that they seem to be a a geophysicist or meteorologist, what proportion cardiologists confer with themselves has a heart wellness care provider or a heart wellness care provider that makes a speciality of stints, none, they could say they seem to be a heart professional focusing on angioplasty. of direction I even have doubts approximately your declare, you are able to say which you're something which you incredibly want. i think of that mendacity and deceit consists of you very needless to say as does the potential to swallow all the B.S which you hear approximately international warming, your demonstrate screen call seems to sum all of it up, think of have the call of a character that may not in uncomplicated terms a drug consumer additionally has a bottomless contempt for conservatives. you are able to, yet probable won't look on the links under that practice that international warming is a FARCE as are human beings such as you that declare to be in touch in this study.

Answer 4

what debate, the bill of rights , also known as the first ten amendments of the constitution, are the law,.....