Arguments for or agents the constitution?

the main arguments against the tatification on the constitution was the the bill of rights to secure ratification and federalisim.

Well there were Federalists who are for the constitution. and the Anti-Federalists who were agenst the constitution.

constitution

what two arguments the federalists used to support the Constitution

The Constitution did not have a section that guaranteed individual rights.

The Federalist argued that the constitution needed to be ratified in order to correct the issues of the Articles of Confederation. The Federalist focused their arguments on the benefits of a national government.

The argument for adding the Bill of Rights to the Constitution was to protect individual freedoms of the citizens.

hi hows it going i hate social studies

adopting the constitution

George Washington's arguments for freedom included that it is a natural right for all people. This means that it is a right one is born with. Washington's arguments for freedom helped shape the First Amendment to the constitution.

There were many arguments made against the adoption of the United States Constitution. The most widely expressed argument was the fact that a centralized government system could weaken the rights and freedoms of the people throughout the country that the document was intended to provide for.

The constitution gives "the right to bear arms". The constitution has the final say in an argument like this and it says that they can have guns.

They wanted a strong central government. Study Island. (;

Geraldo is the answer. Ryan Kingshill. 007.

The federalists made a number of arguments to support the ratification of the constitution. They preferred a strong national government since they believed that if the states had too much power it would result into so many other confederacy governments within the states.

promise of a bill of rights and compromise with anti-federalists

Prevention of anarchy Protection from Forign Enemies

constituation

In light of the fact that obama has not upheld the constitution, and has committed treason himself, perhaps the agents who protect him question if they should protect him. Only the conscious of those agents knows the answer to this question.

When the present Constitution of the United States was proposed for ratification, it faced considerable opposition. James Madison was one of three authors who wrote the Federalist Papers. Those documents argued for the adoption of the constitution and explained the reasons why it was needed. Their arguments were so clear and concise that they overcame the critics to ratification and the constitution was adopted. Thus the constitution was adopted not because the document was presented… Read More

The Federalists were in favor of ratification of the U.S. Constitution rather then the Anti-Federalists, who were not in favor of it because they felt it needed a Bill of Rights.

One of the arguments for not having a Bill of Rights was the thought that it would be misconstrued to mearly be a list of your rights. There should be further information on this debate in the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers.

The Totten clan agreed in ratifying the constitution they immigrated from Scotland to the Americas for hope. This resulted with many followers

The constitution needed more to it, such as a bill of rights, to accurately protect the rights of its citizens for generations to come.

What are powers that Congress has that are specifically listed in the constitution

they supported the right to tax the country, the ratification of the constitution, and they supported a strong central [federal] government

Southern proslavery arguments did not include the belief that slavery was mandated by the Constitution of the United States. Slavery had been a contentious issue between the North and South since the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

Daniel Webster was called the expounder of the constitution because he was a great orator, congressman, and as a lawyer he argued many cases before the Supreme Court. Some of the decisions that they made were based on his arguments.

I'm not sure if there are any arguments for or against the UK constitution as we have only just been given a European constitution. However, any constition would be unlawfull as is the EU const. because we already have a constitution and therefore the existing has to be dismantled which can only be facillitated by the Queens abdication. Although the politicians claim that there is no written const. in England, it is a complete fabrication… Read More

the federalists it has to fix and the antifederalists it is very power

1. gov't with too much power 2.no bill of right 3.dictatorship-president

The main argument against the adoption of the Constitution was the government having too much power. The concern that the states wouldn't have any power was insured by the Bill of Rights.

The anti-Federalists feared that the power of the Federal government might become too strong. This was especially troubling because the Constitution didn't yet include a Bill of Rights.

There were two main Anti-federalist arguments: a) The Constitution gave the federal government too much power and the people weren't represented by it. b) There was no Bill of Rights in the Constitution, and the people's rights weren't put in writing and guaranteed. There were some other, less pressing arguments, such as the ratification process (only 9 out of 13 had to ratify, and some thought all 13 states should have to ratify for the… Read More

The First Amendment to the US Constitution can be used to prevent religious arguments from being used to justify laws limiting civil marriage to heterosexual couples only.

They wanted it to made because it was important for the government to be nationalized.

It is a new game and you should wait a few months. Maybe Then you will find the answer. I am looking for it too, but all i found was bad words and arguments. I am sorry for the iconvenience

The Federalists believed that the Constitution would create unity among the states. The Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution would allow the more educated and wealthy people to rule over the poor people as tyrants.

he argues thatb napoleon was right when he said "Women are just machines for producing babies.

democracy is making people roam free. It is making them not follow the rules of constitution. corruption is increasing. leaders keep changing according to their choice.

The constitution speaks of pursuit of happiness, freedom of speach, freedom of religion... why is interacial marriage allowed

People of the convention argued that if we don't include the bill of rights in the Constitution, it would open doors to tyranny in the government. But in my opioin, our government is already crap so.

Franklin was considered the elder statesman of the Constitutional Convention. He argued for a strong central government that saw to the needs of all it citizens.

the answer is… Read More

The U.S. Constitution takes precedence over, in order of hierarchy, federal statutory law, a state constitution, state statutory law, a local ordinance, administrative rules and rulings, and common law. It is the "Law of the Land." It is worth knowing that the Constitution does not take precedence of the Articles of Confederation where the Treasury was created, therefor the Treasury (IRS) is not bound to the limits of the Constitution nor are its Treasury agents.

The anti-federalists were opposed to the Constitution and actually wanted the Articles of Confederation to be revised if anything. Also, the Federalists (who wanted the constitution) wrote a series of essays to support the Constsitution and to inform people on why the Constitution is a good thing and that it will help America become a more stable country. Some writers are John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton.

Anti-Federalists hated the Constitution for two main reasons: 1- They felt it gave too much power to the national government and not enough to the states and the people. 2-They felt that the Constitution did not defend individual rights of the people (free speech, press, etc..). The second belief became the reason for the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights.

South Carolina had several reasonably valid arguments for why it should be able to secede. The best of these arguments was that the Constitution states that all powers not specifically assigned to the federal government remain with the states. The Constitution does not specifically state that the federal government has the right to remove states from the union, or to force states to stay in the union. Since the federal government wasn't given that power… Read More

The existing laws would protect the rights of the people, so a Bill of Rights was not needed. The Federalists also were in favor of a strong central government.

Including the three-fifths clause and the fugitive slave clause in the constitution would suggest that the country approved of slavery. This is in stark contrast with the constitution's statement that all men are equal.