|
Replies: 41
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
Serious Question RE: Constitutional Rights
Feb 10, 2017, 2:06 PM
|
|
who is afforded Constitutional rights?
and go
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [97731]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64869
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Every single human being, and some animal species***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
The People of the United States***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
of or in?
Feb 10, 2017, 2:09 PM
|
|
or some other group?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
According to the Preamble..."of"***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
I am of....but also have to be IN
Feb 10, 2017, 2:13 PM
|
|
My Constitutional rights do not extend past the borders of the US
do individuals not OF nor IN also have Constitutional rights?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Maybe, constitutionally, you're not allowed to leave.***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:14 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I'm giving it my best shot...
Feb 10, 2017, 2:15 PM
|
|
(The real answer is that it's up for interpretation)
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42195]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38272
Joined: 11/30/98
|
In. Period.
Feb 10, 2017, 2:27 PM
[ in reply to of or in? ] |
|
The Bill of Rights applies to non-citizens as well.
Do we guarantee an attorney to non-citizens who commit crimes? Yes. Do we give them due process? Yes. Are they protected under the First Amendment? Yes. Can the government force non-citizens to house troops in their homes? No.
It's very easy to see that the rights apply to all. Rights reserved for just citizens are labeled as such in the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
Only white males.
Feb 10, 2017, 2:08 PM
|
|
maga
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93673]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95422
Joined: 12/25/09
|
I lied about being Cherokee if that's how it is.***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7207]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9437
Joined: 12/18/13
|
Re: Serious Question RE: Constitutional Rights***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93673]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95422
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Women, minorities and LBGT.***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:12 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2053]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 1493
Joined: 10/27/16
|
No one, really
Feb 10, 2017, 2:13 PM
|
|
Who should be? I would say citizens and legal residents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
Citizens and valid visa holders.
Feb 10, 2017, 2:18 PM
|
|
Although visas can be revoked with cause.
Now the majority can probably agree that someone with a valid visa who has never entered the country can not have constitutional rights, but those in the country and those out of the country who left with a legal right to return have constitutional rights.
That's the primary issue with the executive order, the effect on current visa holders who have already entered the country and cause to revoke them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49050]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38816
Joined: 12/31/97
|
Depends on the amendment
Feb 10, 2017, 2:18 PM
|
|
Many reference that no "person" shall be denied the rights therein, others define rights that cannot be abridged without reference to who can assert them and the 14th actually references citizens being denied rights before expanding that to persons when affording rights to life liberty and property, due process and equal protection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
so Constitutional rights extend to persons neither of nor in
Feb 10, 2017, 2:22 PM
|
|
the united states?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49050]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38816
Joined: 12/31/97
|
If a policy favors one religion over another
Feb 10, 2017, 2:53 PM
|
|
which I'm not trying to debate at all in this context, then yes, it might violate the US Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49050]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38816
Joined: 12/31/97
|
But standing to sue is another question***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:55 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
What do you think of them granting standing to the states?
Feb 10, 2017, 3:22 PM
|
|
Seems like allowing them to sue on behalf of immigrants as a class opens up a whole barrel of monkeys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42195]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38272
Joined: 11/30/98
|
This is a simple answer
Feb 10, 2017, 2:25 PM
|
|
Our founding fathers were very clear in our Constitution about the difference between a person and a citizen. Some rights are only afforded to citizens, and they are mapped out clearly (such as the right to run for president, or what defines you as a citizen).
But the basic rights outlined, such as in the Bill of Rights, are attributed to people, meaning everyone on U.S. soil regardless of citizenship. That's the same as how laws apply to you when you visit other countries.
Our founding fathers believed that it wasn't just Americans who should have these rights. They believed them to be rights we received upon birth. As Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration, these are rights that come from the Creator and are guaranteed (whether you believe in a Creator or not).
Our founding fathers, in fact, hoped that they would set an example for the world with them (point to American Exceptionalism). In many cases, they were. Remember, our nation was born from the Enlightenment and the idea that humans are born with natural freedom.
To think these basic rights are only afforded to U.S. citizens is not only an incorrect interpretation of the Constitution, but also a rather disturbing mindset: Why would you NOT want every human being to be afforded these basic rights?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Like if you are in the US, you have the right to life...
Feb 10, 2017, 2:27 PM
|
|
to not be murdered. No matter if you are citizen or not.
(Just thinking out loud. This is an interesting conversation.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31650
Joined: 8/27/02
|
You love to throw the abortion curveball into unrelated
Feb 10, 2017, 2:29 PM
|
|
conversations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Whoa, I didn't know I did that...***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
But now that I read my post, I can't say it doesn't apply.
Feb 10, 2017, 2:30 PM
|
|
So thanks, I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31650
Joined: 8/27/02
|
Fair enough. Apologies if I misread.***
Feb 10, 2017, 2:37 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Well, I've heard many preachers say...
Feb 10, 2017, 2:39 PM
|
|
"If you're phone's ringin', answer it."
I heard the phone ring when you posted what you did. Though unintentional, the post says what it says.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
*your
Feb 10, 2017, 2:39 PM
|
|
I'm going home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31650
Joined: 8/27/02
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
I agree with ALL of that so the question is
Feb 10, 2017, 2:35 PM
[ in reply to This is a simple answer ] |
|
persons not OF the US or IN the US? do they have constitutional rights?
Specifically, these "refugees" are neither of the US nor IN the US. However they are being afforded constitutional rights by the courts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
But the executive order didn't specify who the ban applied
Feb 10, 2017, 2:43 PM
|
|
to and who it didn't. So a stay to protect the rights of visa holders in the US also applies to those who have not entered the US.
Trump could correct this very easily by rescinding the EO and issuing a new one with clarity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42195]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38272
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
yes. how can a court grant constitutional rights to a
Feb 10, 2017, 5:14 PM
|
|
foreign national on foreign soil who has ZERO tie to the US, other than they want to come?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
They didn't, they issued a stay on the order...
Feb 10, 2017, 5:45 PM
|
|
because the order included those who are on US soil legally or have been and were not allowed to return. The case has not been heard yet, they granted a stay because of irreparable harm to some who have rights from those countries. Like the Clemson PhD grad working in Greenville who was only allowed to return because of the stay and held a valid multiple entry visa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93673]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95422
Joined: 12/25/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42195]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38272
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I think the argument they're making on that...
Feb 10, 2017, 9:54 PM
[ in reply to yes. how can a court grant constitutional rights to a ] |
|
The government is violating the First Amendment part where it concerns respecting or prohibiting a religion since they're arguing that the ban is influenced by religious bias.
I think it's not so much about the rights of the refugees as it is about the government obeying the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31650
Joined: 8/27/02
|
This is an important question so we can determine whose
Feb 10, 2017, 2:27 PM
|
|
inalienable rights, endowed by our Creator, can be trampled without breaking any laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
what about those who do not believe in a creator?
Feb 10, 2017, 2:39 PM
|
|
can THEY be trampled?
We are looking for someone to trample here!!!
Work with us!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
John Locke didn't think that atheism should tolerated
Feb 10, 2017, 3:11 PM
|
|
Much of our government is based on Lockean philosophy. Therefore, atheists can be trampled. QED.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23420
Joined: 8/16/03
|
The Constitution isn't just about rights, it's also about
Feb 10, 2017, 5:28 PM
|
|
distribution and limitation of power by the government. It sets rules not exclusively on how citizens need to be treated, but also on the types of decisions that the government is allowed to make.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 41
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
