The legal sense of rights states that all other conceptions of rights, such as American views are described as liberty and privileges. The government felt that the Americans rights had distinct power and could be given and taken away by them. The Americans disagreed with the government because they viewed rights as something that was owned indisputably and entitled to them at birth. The British however, believed that they had
They believed that each state should have a self governed, and independent. Anti-Federalists also argued that there was no bill of rights, and the Congress and executive branch held too much power. But mostly the lack of a bill of rights was the focus of the Anti-Federalist against ratifying the Constitution. But Federalists on the other hand favored the creation of a strong federal government that would more closely unite the states as one large, continental nation of a strong federal government that would more closely unite the states as one large, continental nation. The Federalists like the separation of powers into three independent branches protected the rights of the people.
Both classes had disagreements with the Articles of Confederation. Federalists say that the articles were weak and ineffective because the state governments was too weak to apply laws and ordered for a national government instead. We Anti-federalists however believed that the Articles of Confederation was a good plan and that there should not be a government more powerful than the state governments. Believing that state governments should have more power compared to the national government was one of the big reasons why the anti-federalists supported the Articles of Confederation. How about the U.S constitution, what factors were held to point out?
For example, there are multiple reasons why I disagree with Ambrose Bierce’s quote: “Un-American, adj. Wicked, intolerable, heathenish.” First of all, in this country, all citizens are entitled to their own opinions. Second, just because some don’t agree with other’s opinions doesn’t give them the right to declare them wrong. And also, even someone doing the bare minimum is still doing something to help. In the United States of America, the people are protected by a group of laws called the Constitution.
D) Another point of opposition to the Constitution was that it lacked a bill of rights. Under the Articles of Confederation, each
During the creation of Constitution, each state had to approve it. During this time there were people who supported it, Federalist and who did not, Anti-Federalists. I am siding with Anti-Federalist since they were right in thinking they did not want to give all their power away to the national government. If you lived in a state separate from where government state is established, how would you get your problems in your state solved if you had a government who was telling you what to do but not really knowing what problems you had in your state. If I lived back in that time, and having just finished the war with Britain where we finally got our independence, I would remind people all the issues we had.
The controversy of the argument was on the basis that, “there was an inherent connection between the states and the preservation of individual liberty, which is the end of any legitimate government.” Their own argument have invariably created a national government instead of a federal government. This is because “the federal form, which regards the Union as a confederacy of sovereign states, instead of which, they have framed a national government, which regards the Union as a consolidation of the states.” Anti-federalists were against constructing a new constitution and they agreed that without valid amendments the constitution would give the government too much power. This power would then lead to confusion according to the (Centinel 1787) “ The new constitution instead of being panacea or cure of every grievance so delusively represented by its advocated will be found upon examination like Pandora’s box replete with every
Sam Brockie November 9, 2009 Period 6 Being an American Essay The most important civic value an American citizen should have is responsibility. If our citizens did not have responsibility then America would be plunged into anarchy and chaos. One must possess responsibility and self control if one is to have such freedoms as guaranteed to every American. Responsibility is so important to being an American because the government cannot have complete control over us. If citizens are to be entrusted with such cherished personal freedoms as guaranteed in the constitution, then they must have the responsibility to obey the law and to be productive, lest their freedoms be taken away.
If the Fifth Amendment did not exist, United States citizens would not have the rights that are current in our government. That would create problems for the government. If their were wasn’t a fifth amendment a lot of criminals would be able to be on the streets instead of in jails because they didn’t have a fair trial to show if they were innocent or not. It also guarantees the court systems will be balanced and you will be promised a fair trial in which you can or will not be released from prison. If their was no fifth amendment the government can do what ever they wanted whenever they wanted with no say.
Douglass tries to say that the Constitution argues for the freedom of the people, not for slavery. The third viewpoint’s main point is that Constitutional rights do not extend to ex-slaves. This is written by chief justice, Roger Taney, who decided the Dred Scott decision, which took away his freedom. This argues that the Constitution does not allow slaves to be given their citizenship. Slaves are not entitled to the same rights in the Constitution because the rights do not extend to them.