[ETWolverine]

Hello again, El:

I smoke my trans fats thank you very much, and the government don't know nothing about it, see?

Now, I'm no fan of the government doing any of the above... Ceptin, I DO like the cigarette ban? Don't you?

Can you imagine it? As you pass by a dark alley, you hear a hoarse whisper "Nickel bags of Baccy here?

excon

Actually, in a few years we'll be passing a dark alley, and hear a hoarse whisper, "Nickel bags of bevacizumab, sorafenib and temsirolimus here."

Kidney cancer patients denied life-saving drugs by NHS rationing body NICE | Mail Online

Or, "Get your hear surgery done here."

Girl, 3, has heart operation cancelled three times because of bed shortage - Times Online

"Baccy" is going to be the least of our problems.

Elliot

[ETWolverine]

Hello gal:

Well, I already explained how it had to do with gay marriage. So, you're probably not gonna let me have more than one right outta that amendment....

But, the truth is, the Ninth Amendment simply says that there are other rights besides the ten listed. This, or frankly any other right that may become apparent in the future, can be found here. Are there right's that we haven't even discussed yet??? I dunno. We'll see. But, if we do, the Ninth Amendment is where it is.

excon

If that is your evidence, then we have a problem. Because in that case, ANYTHING can be considered a right. I have the right to punch you in the face if I want. I have the right to steal your car or burn your house down. Just because that "right" isn't enumerated in the Constitution doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I say it does, therefore it does.

That's the logic you are using. ANYTHING I WANT is a right because of the 9th Amendment. I want health care, therefore it is a right. And there is no proof that it isn't a right because the 9th Amendment says that even if it isn't enumerated in the Constitution it is still a right.

Sorry, but even if it is true that there are other rights than those enumerated by the Constitution, you have to PROVE that a right to health insurance or a right to health care exists and is one of those rights not enumerated by the Constitution.

And you can't prove that. Because they aren't. Much as people would like them to be rights, there is no legal or historical evidence that that is the case.

Elliot

[speechlesstx]

Ok of topic sort of, but didn't the military recently say there were going to implement no-smoking into the armed forces? Wouldn't that be almost the same thing you are talkin about ex?

I heard yesterday that the military nixed that idea, said with everything they do for us and all they go through they're not going to tell them they can't smoke.

[speechlesstx]

Actually, in a few years we'll be passing a dark alley, and hear a hoarse whisper, "Nickel bags of bevacizumab, sorafenib and temsirolimus here."

Kidney cancer patients denied life-saving drugs by NHS rationing body NICE | Mail Online

Or, "Get your hear surgery done here."

Girl, 3, has heart operation cancelled three times because of bed shortage - Times Online

"Baccy" is going to be the least of our problems.

Elliot

Yep, instead of "back alley abortions" it'll be back alley Aricept.

[galveston]

Hello gal:

Well, I already explained how it had to do with gay marriage. So, you're probably not gonna let me have more than one right outta that amendment....

But, the truth is, the Ninth Amendment simply says that there are other rights besides the ten listed. This, or frankly any other right that may become apparent in the future, can be found here. Are there right's that we haven't even discussed yet??? I dunno. We'll see. But, if we do, the Ninth Amendment is where it is.

excon

No Sir. That amendment plainly says that any power or right not EXPRESSLY given to the federal government remains with the STATES.

Now if a STATE wants to provide universal health care for its citizens, that is its right, but it does not belong to the Federal government.

Of course, that amendment, along with much of the Constitution has been ignored for generations, but don't try to claim that it gives citizens the RIGHT to health care. It doesn't give citizens the right to anything. It gives the STATES all rights not reserved to the fed.

I don't know what you are getting at on the cigarette comment.

[tomder55]

Kudos for your understanding of the 9th amendment gal.

[excon]

No Sir. That amendment plainly says that any power or right not EXPRESSLY given to the federal government remains with the STATES.

kudos for your understanding of the 9th amendment gal.

Hello again:

Sorry guys. "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain, rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the "PEOPLE".

excon

[tomder55]

Oops mixed the 9th and 10th up

One question .How can we know which rights are retained by "the people " when the people so often disagree on what is a legitimate right ?

[galveston]

Hello again:

Sorry guys. "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain, rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the "PEOPLE".

excon

The lowest level that the PEOPLE are represented at is the COUNTY, and that still comes under STATE jurisdiction, not FEDERAL which remains the idea of Amendment IX.

It is a STATE RIGHTS amendment placed by people who feared exactly what we now see coming out of Washington.

So contrary to what you say, the 9th Amendment tells us that the Federal government has no right to step in and order universal health care along with its confiscatory taxes and Orwellian controls.

[excon]

One question .How can we know which rights are retained by "the people " when the people so often disagree on what is a legitimate right ?

Hello again, tom:

I don't know. I suppose like we do now - SCOTUS.

Look. I don't know what rights are in this grab bag. But, I KNOW there are rights in there, because the amendment says so.

I think a right for gays to marry can be found there, as well as a right to health care. You can't tell me they're NOT there, unless you can tell me which ones ARE there. Because sure as shooting, there ARE some. I don't believe the founders just wanted to hear themselves talk.

What I believe to be the case, and I've argued it before, is that by LISTING certain rights, as the first eight amendments do, the founders wanted make sure that those rights, which MAY not be listed, are STILL rights retained by the people. Maybe they anticipated this exact scenario. They were pretty smart, you know.

excon

[tomder55]

And that's why they wrote an amendment process into the constitution to resolve such disputes. Otherwise ;as gal says ,the local gvt makes the call. It is not the role of SCOTUS to decide what is and isn't a right. That is too much power for an unelected lifetime appointment .

[Chey5782]

I believe they refer to that as consensus decision-making. The rights retained by the people are defined by the people themselves. Or more suitably put, a group of people elected by the people to speak for the people in matters discussing the people. (I hate political terms) Democracy at work. Then they go fight with each other about it for years and years. We hold these truths to be self evident?

[excon]

The lowest level that the PEOPLE are represented at is the COUNTY, and that still comes under STATE jurisdiction, not FEDERAL which remains the idea of Amendment IX.

It is a STATE RIGHTS amendment placed by people who feared exactly what we now see coming out of Washington.

Hello again, gal:

Nahhhh. If the states have rights outlined in the Constitution, they certainly wouldn't be spelled out in the BILL OF RIGHTS... Nope, the intention of the Bill of Rights is clear, and it AIN'T to GIVE power to the government - state or otherwise... It's exactly the opposite. The Bill of Rights expressly tells the government what it CAN'T do.


excon

[ETWolverine]

Again excon, in order for the 9th Amendment to apply, you would have to be able to prove that such a right actually does exist. There is no historical or legal precedent that proves that medical care or medical insurance are personal rights. IF such a right existed, then yes, they would be guaranteed by the 9th Amendment. But there is no evidence that such a right does or ever has existed.

Again, it would be the same as me saying that I have a right to punch you in the nose, and that such a right is guaranteed to me by the 9th Amendment. It isn't enumerated in the Constitution as a right, but the 9th Amendment says that it's a right anyway.

Your argument leaves out the part about proving the existence of that right in the first place... which you cannot do because such a right doesn't really exist.

[Chey5782]

Mmmm, I take issue with the term medical care.

Oh, and BOOSH 992 F2d 1223 Parnisi v. Colorado State Hospital Z | Open Jurist

Technically that is the 8th amendment... but it took me about 4 seconds to find that on Google. I am a Google master. I don't even have to agree. Bring it on nancy boy. ;)

[excon]

Again, it would be the same as me saying that I have a right to punch you in the nose, and that such a right is guaranteed to me by the 9th Amendment.

Your argument leaves out the part about proving the existence of that right in the first place...

Hello again, El:

Your first comment is just too stupid for me to respond to it... You second comment is pretty stupid too, but I'll address it.

You say that I have to PROVE that rights exist... Where does it say that in the Constitution? You're making it up as you go along.

Look, the Ninth Amendment says there are other rights. I happen to believe it. I don't think the framers were just filling up space when they wrote it. I say again, if you can't tell me WHAT those OTHER rights ARE, then you certainly can't tell me what they AREN'T..

excon

[ETWolverine]

excon,

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals stated as follows in Gibson v. Matthews, 926 F.2d 532, 537 (6th Cir. 1991):

[T]he ninth amendment does not confer substantive rights in addition to those conferred by other portions of our governing law. The ninth amendment was added to the Bill of Rights to ensure that the maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius would not be used at a later time to deny fundamental rights merely because they were not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.




Justice Arthur Goldberg joined by Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice William Brennan expressed this view in a concurring opinion in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut (1965):

The Framers did not intend that the first eight amendments be construed to exhaust the basic and fundamental rights... I do not mean to imply that the .... Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of rights protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government...



Justice Antonin Scalia in Troxel v. Granville (2000):

The Declaration of Independence... is not a legal prescription conferring powers upon the courts; and the Constitution's refusal to 'deny or disparage' other rights is far removed from affirming any one of them, and even farther removed from authorizing judges to identify what they might be, and to enforce the judges' list against laws duly enacted by the people.


Nowhere will you find anyone who says that the 9th Amendment creates or confers rights. You cannot "find" a right within the 9th Amendment. You cannot find a right to health care or health insurance in the 9th Amendment. You cannot find ANY rights in the 9th Amendment. All that the 9th Amendment says is that IF THERE IS A RIGHT that is not enumerated in the Constitution, that right cannot be taken away by the government. The 14th Amendment affirms that this rule applies to the states as well as to the federal government.

Your interpretation of the 9th Amendment as granting us a right to health care (or any other right) is incorrect.

Elliot

[speechlesstx]

10th amendment, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. "

[excon]

The ninth amendment was added to the Bill of Rights to ensure that the maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius would not be used at a later time to deny fundamental rights merely because they were not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

Hello again, El:

Bingo!

excon

[galveston]

So we see that Amendments IX and X are similar in that they LIMIT the powers of the federal government, but DO NOT limit what the several states may allow.

In short, the federal government has overstepped its Constitutional authority for a LONG time on a LOT of policies.

Show me any right to abortion, health care, or guaranteed wage in the US Constituton. Show me me where the US Constitution gives the federal government liberty to run the educational system, or banks, or manufacturing.

Show me where the federal government has the Constitutional right to turn the issuing of money over to a private corporation.

I could go on.