A constitution is a set of fundamental and entrenched rules governing the conduct of an organisation or nation, establishing its concept, character, and structure. It is usually a short document general nature and embodying the aspirations of values of its writers and subjects. (Business Dictionary, 2015). A constitution is the ultimate authority; any action, which contravenes the rules of the constitution, will be both unconstitutional and unlawful. It will also help identify the rights and freedoms of citizens through a bill of rights, which operates both to protect citizens and to restrict the power of the state.
Civil rights can be described as the rights which involve the interaction of individuals with the society. Civil rights include expression of thoughts, even expression of new thoughts should not be prevented. It also includes freedom of expression of religion, speech etc. Political rights include mainly legal rights. It involves right to justice and petition, to associate and assemble, right to a fair trials etc.
When a society develops, it will become necessary for a government to compensate for the eventual defect of moral virtue in individuals. However, as this is what is necessary for government to supply, that is the extent the government should be involved according to Paine. The freedom and security of a society is the aim of a government, aims which should not be overstepped. This concept of limiting government to its intended purpose is seen most clearly in the libertarian movement in modern times. Libertarianism is still keenly influenced by Paine’s anti-Federalists sentiments within this paper simply applied to modern issues.
This constitution focused too much on giving more power to the people and not enough on giving the right amount of power to the government. Washington said that this government system was a rushed and poorly structured
The laws of the country using a written constitution are determinable. The written constitution helps to prevent the fusion of powers by upholding clarity in the principle of separation of powers. Possibilities of conflicting rules are greatly minimized. The determinable nature of the written constitution helps the possibility for easily predictions the outcome of certain actions (e.g. criminal or civil thoughts).
Larry alexander considers a few deontological theories and the outcome free speech will bring. The first is the liberal non-appropriation theory which is against the unconsented appropriation of anyone’s labour, talents or organs. He also considers free speech as an essential tool to democratic decision making. This theory comes in three different forms, the first being the general theory. This derives the right to free speech from the democratic necessity of an informed nation.
Right now a debate is occurring about whether not we should ratify the Constitution. This is an important moment in our country's history because this is the moment where we could unify and become a government or we could disapprove of the Constitution and have troubles between the country.The Articles of Confederation were not very credible because it gave the states too much power; which were too weak. The debts were not getting payed and the country was in great trouble. The Constitution would let the power will lie with the wealthy men, and not give the power to the states to raise money to pay off debt; the country will still remain in debt if we ratify the Constitution. Also, the wealthy is known to be rich, so as they collect more and more taxes, they will spend it on stuff we don't need; instead of paying it on taxes.
We have all been through rough times, have we not? Sir Patrick Henry speaks of the tyranny of British rule, but is it really all that bad? If you were in the same position as our great King George, what else would you do? We started ourselves into a war that we were not prepared to fight on our own, and so the generous King provided us with soldiers to help win the battle. This war was very taxing on Britain—we are in great debt—and the King is merely trying to help us get out of the debt.
• Civil liberty are established for the good of the community. • Civil liberty ensures that citizens exercise customary rights without government interference. This are rights guaranteed by the laws of a state. • Civil rights on the other hand are citizens rights to political and social problem. • Civil rights in
Barnett explains that constitutional law governs the role and powers of the institutions within the state and with the relationship between the citizen and the state. At any point in time, the constitution manifests the moral and political values of the people it governs. It deals with the rights and privileges of the individuals and the state. Around the world, two dominant types of constitutional law are found, where the determining factor is whether constitution is written or unwritten. Classical constitutional legal theory suggests that the power of a parliament is omnipotent or sovereign when there is no written constitution, which is important to understand legislative
Mill considers this situation also very concerning, referring to it as “the tyranny of the majority” (4). Even without a formal law or government in place, the citizens of a society tend to regulate themselves to a certain extent. However, this extent, more often than not, turns into a autocratic opinion that shames the minority that has a different perspective. Society must take into consideration these defective forms of decision making while determining the legal status of polygamy. To arrive at a fair decision, the citizens and their governing body would have to work in conjunction.
As standing armies were marching along the debate floor another issue was power of state authority over Federal authority. This clash in authority came from the juiced up legislatures which were often extremely powerful under the Articles. Considered by Rutland as ”a loose, incomplete agreement”, the issue for Anti-Federalists was the weak powerful government was morphing into an aristocratic system. Rutland points out a few words from George Mason, who believed the Constitution “Would erect at the outset a moderate aristocracy. Which would evolve into either a monarchy or a corrupt, tyrannical aristocracy”(42)and called on the hatred of monarchy by local people.
As it stands now the concept is not constitutional, an altar to the first and twenty-fourth amendments would be required at least, and that would still not guarantee it to pass. Finally, as results have shown it is often difficult or even not worth enforcing. Causing either dishonesty or the entire system to be thrown out the window. Is it truly worth all this time and money to attempt an idea that might blow up in the American people face strictly to help people who are too lazy to head out to the polls? Is it truly that impossible to head out one day for less than an hour, check some names and propositions on a paper and leave?
The Due Process includes the rights of “life, liberty and property”, it is about each citizen. However, the Equal Protection Clause includes protecting a specific group from discrimination. If the problem is about the Fundamental Rights of people, The Strict Scrutiny, the standard is used to weigh the government 's interest against a constitutional right or principle, is used but if it is about the Ordinary Rights of people, the Rational Basis Test, which requires the government to show only the action is rationally related to a legitimate government interest,
The Anti-Federalists that opposed the constitution believed that the constitution would give too much power to the government. The Anti-Federalists argued that a powerful government would become tyrannical like the British monarchy that they worked so hard to escape from. This led them to create The Bill of Rights. Today’s government has similar problems. Nowadays some politicians believe that The Bill of Rights is a living document that can be changed or manipulated to “better fit” the era that we live in.