Celebrate your rights

December 15, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Dec. 15 is Bill of Rights Day. Which of the first 10 amendments is the most important?

We Americans take for granted a lot of the freedoms we have in this country, freedoms outlined in our Constitution. There’s a group out there – appropriately named The Bill of Rights Institute  – that wants to help remind us about the rights that are protected in the first 10 amendments. That’s why the institute is asking Americans to take 10 minutes to read the Bill of Rights on Dec. 15, the 220th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights.

Dec. 15 also happens to be a day of federal observance since 1941.

There’s no doubt the first 10 amendments give us certain key protections and rights in this country, and it may be difficult to pick which one you think is the most important or significant. Is it the First Amendment, allowing us the ability to worship or not worship whomever or whatever we’d like, say or write whatever we want (within reason), or peaceably assembly? What about the Second Amendment allowing us the right to bear arms? The Fourth Amendment – protecting us against illegal search and seizure – often is the topic of lawsuits and court cases.

Thanks to the Bill of Rights, we can “plead the Fifth” and be protected from “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Since you’re in the legal profession, there’s a good chance you’re more familiar with the Bill of Rights than the general public, whom this day is probably geared toward. Do you think the general public is as educated as they should be on their Constitutional rights? Is there a particular amendment you think is the most important?


 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Celebrate?
    Neither Amendments nor Bill of Rights apply to proceedings involving DCS. They are not only ignored, but treated with distain in the State of Indiana.
    They unlawfully 'seize' your children absent the requirements of probable cause in violation of their 4th. They force you to take 'services' by holding your children hostage which meets the federal definition of kindnapping. They force you to take a Psycological Evaluations in violation of you 5th to not incriminate yourself as well as drug and alcohol assessment. Your 9th is clearly violated as well as you 14th (Denial of Civil Rights Under Color of Law). There are maybe 2 or 3 Amendments that they do not violate on a daily basis.
    See what happens when you try and exert your rights. These people with 6 weeks training have the power to take your first born and even the IRS can't do that. They are accountable to no one and judges meet ex-parte to make sure the system is full of children for the sake of money. They skip the first 2 requiremenst of 671 and go straight to removal. There are many satellitte industries that depend on this income. They are paid $4000-$6000 bonuses per child for removal and other bonuses each time they change foster homes. They also enjoy Adoption bonuses as well.
    When it comes to monies received by the DCS and the court system, Amendments or Rights are not in existence. Just ask anyone who has been in the system which is part of a greater plan of the 'nanny state'
    Do your research and see who has actually beat DCS in Federal Court. I can find only 2 nationwide. To claim that we actually have Rights in this arena is nothing but a cruel joke.
  • ultramontanist
    Judge Learned Hand said if the spirit of liberty is not in the people, then no paper will save it. Or words to that effect.

    We all know that "the people" of 2012 as compared to "the people" of Learned Hand's time are a very different "people." They do not share the same predominant ethnicities, not the same religious composition, not the same average occupations nor economic interests nor for any of that, most of all, we lack cultural consensus. It is as many have remarked the twilight of an Empire. Maybe that is a good thing. Let's put a nail in the coffin of the idea of a confessional state. I only confess one religious faith and it is not to Americanism.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT