The Bill of Rights Doesn’t Apply to the States

Jun 2012
41,958
15,181
Barsoom
Sergio Leonard of Beards of Fury takes an in depth look at our Bill of Rights and breaks it down Barney style as to why the Bill of Rights applies to our federal government, and not to the individual states. Click the link below to read what he has to say!

Article: BEARDS OF FURY: The Bill of Rights Doesn?t Apply to the States

Beards of Fury Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Beards-of-Fury/240508862765055
Why not post the article; it links to just a Facebook page and that doesn't lend well to a discussion here.

I would like to read that article.
 
Last edited:
Nov 2012
11,288
9,641
nirvana
Sergio Leonard of Beards of Fury takes an in depth look at our Bill of Rights and breaks it down Barney style as to why the Bill of Rights applies to our federal government, and not to the individual states. Click the link below to read what he has to say!

Article: BEARDS OF FURY: The Bill of Rights Doesn?t Apply to the States

Beards of Fury Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Beards-of-Fury/240508862765055
Interesting. So the states can deny it's citizens their right to free speech, and the ability to own firearms? Considering the fact that the 10th Amendment states all rights not enumerated are reserved to the states or the people. At what point do the peoples rights over ride those of the states? So the states are the ultimate arbiter of rights, and the people and Constitution are a distant second? It's about the states and only the states. It's states, states, states. When the founders were writing the Constitution their main focus was the states? So if the people of all of the states decided to end all state governments tomorrow, and exist as just one entity with no states, that would be a violation of Constitutional principles? Were the Bill of Rights not written to protect the citizens from the tyranny of the states which is where true tyranny resides? Was Lincoln wrong in his attempt to preserve the union from the tyranny of insurrectionist states that denied human rights to it's citizens, because the states are such guardians of everything that is good and true?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Jun 2012
41,958
15,181
Barsoom
Interesting. So the states can deny it's citizens their right to free speech, and the ability to own firearms? Considering the fact that the 10th Amendment states all rights not enumerated are reserved to the states or the people. At what point do the peoples rights over ride those of the states? So the states are the ultimate arbiter of rights, and the people and Constitution are a distant second? It's about the states and only the states. It's states, states, states. When the founders were writing the Constitution their main focus was the states? So if the people of all of the states decided to end all state governments tomorrow, and exist as just one entity with no states, that would be a violation of Constitutional principles? Were the Bill of Rights not written to protect the citizens from the tyranny of the states which is where true tyranny resides? Was Lincoln wrong in his attempt to preserve the union from the tyranny of insurrectionist states that denied human rights to it's citizens, because the states are such guardians of everything that is good and true?
You are infinitely out of your league with your post.
 
Nov 2012
11,288
9,641
nirvana
You are infinitely out of your league with your post.
I am? The Union army which kicked your ass, and told you how it was going to be begs to differ with you. A state is nothing more than a piece of land with a boundary line drawn around it. It no more has any rights than my truck does. Read the 10th Amendment very carefully. All rights not enumerated are reserved for the states or the people. It's the people of the states that have the rights, and as stated rights not enumerated, which means the rights that are enumerated over ride any state laws or any restrictions state governments may try to impose on those rights. Bottom line? States have no rights. Only the citizens that reside within them, and their Constitutional rights are enforce no matter what a state government has to say about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Jun 2012
41,958
15,181
Barsoom
I am? The Union army which kicked your ass, and told you how it was going to be begs to differ with you. A state is nothing more than a piece of land with a boundary line drawn around it. It no more has any rights than my truck does. Read the 10th Amendment very carefully. All rights not enumerated are reserved for the states or the people. It's the people of the states that have the rights, and as stated rights not enumerated, which means the rights that are enumerated over ride any state laws or any restrictions state governments may try to impose on those rights. Bottom line? States have no rights. Only the citizens that reside within them, and their Constitutional rights are enforce no matter what a state government has to say about it.
You have wandered further out of your league. You have wandered so far, I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You can start with what happened to Madison's original 5th Amendment and Marshall's ruling in Barron v. Baltimore.
 
Nov 2012
11,288
9,641
nirvana
You have wandered further out of your league. You have wandered so far, I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You can start with what happened to Madison's original 5th Amendment and Marshall's ruling in Barron v. Baltimore.
I don't have to read anything. The founders wrote the Constitution in plain language for the people at that time, at the level of education that existed at the time. It was not written for lawyers or courts to interpret. I can read and interpret just fine what the Constitution says, and states have no rights period, end of discussion. Lincoln made that perfectly clear to the south in the 1860's that thought otherwise. That conclusion is still in effect today, and no further interpretation is required.

STATES HAVE NO RIGHTS.

Deal with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Jun 2012
41,958
15,181
Barsoom
I don't have to read anything. The founders wrote the Constitution in plain language for the people at that time, at the level of education that existed at the time. It was not written for lawyers or courts to interpret. I can read and interpret just fine what the Constitution says, and states have no rights period, end of discussion. Lincoln made that perfectly clear to the south in the 1860's that thought otherwise. That conclusion is still in effect today, and no further interpretation is required.

STATES HAVE NO RIGHTS.

Deal with it.
To put it as kindly as I can, you are one of the more illiterate people I have come across regarding this topic, and that says a lot. Not only can you not stay on point, you are as equipped to rebut what I stated as a cockroach, and so far a cockroach has the edge.

Try disproving what Madison's original 5th Amendment said and what happened to it, and Marshall's ruling in Barron v. Baltimore.

I am not interested your hate for America driven agenda, so stick with facts and evidence. If it calms you down, go burn a Bible and the American flag, then give it another shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Oct 2013
1,919
590
Seattle