Even putting aside the obvious equality issues, you have to wonder about the mindset of those who try so hard to determine what is NOT a right.
Like people who like to examine the Constitution only to point out what is NOT explicitly included (such as the right of privacy, for example). What kind of instincts motivate them? They seem to painfully misunderstand the very purpose of the Bill of Rights. I’m paraphrasing the wonderful writer Peter David here — one of his columns excellently explained that the Constitution is meant to preserve and expand rights, and not to limit them.
Isn’t the Ninth Amendment supposed to confer all reasonably expected rights that are not included elsewhere in the document? It is there because the Founding Fathers knew that other fundamental rights, not explicitly spelled out in the Bill of Rights, could come under attack.
This ad is logically rickety…
View original post 64 more words
