0
Why would many people who opposed the constitution argue for a bill of rights?
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
People that opposed the US Constitution argued in favor of the Bill of Rights. They felt the constitution itself would give all powers to the government officials and jeopardize the freedoms of the people. The Bill of Rights laid clear understanding that these rights and freedoms of the people could not be violated regardless of the actions of the government officials.
Marguerite Considine
Wiki User
∙ 9y agoPeople that opposed the US Constitution argued in favor of the Bill of Rights. They felt the constitution itself would give all powers to the government officials and jeopardize the freedoms of the people. The Bill of Rights laid clear understanding that these rights and freedoms of the people could not be violated regardless of the actions of the government officials.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
The main purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to?
2
Declaration of Independence could this document be used to argue for quitting?
The Declaration of Independence document can be used to argue for quitting. The Declaration of Independence document is used only for Theory and Natural rights.
Some people argue that anyone who accepts a presidential pardon what?
How can a president pardon himself without admitting to a crime
What rights did John C. Calhon argue that tariffs violated?
John C. Calhoun argued that the tariffs violated equal rights. According to his perspective, tariffs not only favored the northern states, but also harmed the southern states. Imported goods hurt the income of all people in South Carolina. As far as Calhoun was concerned, helping support the northern industrial base was not the purpose of the federal government.
Was the 14th Amendment legally ratified?
the 14th amendment has become successful, but knot right away. it was about a hundred years after it came out that people in the civil rights movement used it argue their point, this gave women and African Americans equal rights, but not until after it was used by activists.
Why did antifederalists argue against ratification of the constitution?
it had no bill of rights
What were some problems with the constitution?
people argue sometimes. Thats just the way it is.
A government in power may argue that rights can be violated if what?
A government in power may argue that rights can be violated if
Why do people have a responibility to respect the rights of others?
Some would argue that people have a moral responsibility to respect the rights of others. It would also be difficult to have a healthy and well-functioning society if people did not respect the rights of others.
According to the ACLU who is their client in every case they handle?
First and foremost, the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Some people would say the American People but I would argue they represent anyone who would be affected by the dilution, alteration or denial of the rights, regardless of whether they are citizens or not. Their stance in defense of the Bill of Rights and Constitution has led many to lead a claim that the ACLU are communist, socialist or unpatriotic. Their critics contend that true Americans support the government no matter what their stance or position despite the fact that the Government is created by and derives its authority from the Constitution.
Did Jefferson argue with the necessary addition to the constitution and why?
Yes, Jefferson argued with the necessary addition to the constitution. This is because he felt he had to protect the people from the abuses of power and government.
What three natural rights did Locke argue that all people possess?
To be born free, equal and independent.
What did The Federalist argue about the constitution?
About Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson
Did john Locke and Thomas Hobbes argue that people have a set of natural rights and give some up to society?
yes
What is the constitution of Zambia?
Constitutionalism is a concept that can be said to suggest a constitution that is fair. One that curtails the arbitrary use of power by the state organs and one that protects the fundamental human rights of the people. In Zambia, we may see this concept adhered to in the constitution, which is a written document and is the supreme law. It contains laws that protect the fundamental rights of the people and those in power are accountable to the people for their actions. However, the extent to which the Zambian constitution follows the principal of constitutionalism is also debatable as there are some laws that infringe upon this concept. For example, as much as the rights of the people are protected, they also have their limitations. Now, these limitations are meant to be in place to make sure that in their enjoyment of rights individual citizens do not infringe upon the rights of others but, scholars argue that the government at times uses these limitations to tamper with the rights of the citizens. And lastly but not the least it is also argued that the President holds too much power. He is the head of state, the commander-in-chief, a part of the legislation process and his cabinet propose all Bills to be passed or debated upon in the National Assembly.
John Locke did NOT argue that natural rights included the right to?
criminals do no not deserve to have rights
Why did strict constructionists argue that the government should not create a national bank?
Alexander Hamilton opposed the idea
