6 ms·
It would be nice to see folks who take such a rigorous stance on the First and Second Amendments (not in this article, but in author’s book _Battlefield America
by birdofhermes 3y ago
It would be nice to see folks who take such a rigorous stance on the First and Second Amendments (not in this article, but in author’s book _Battlefield America_) adopt similarly rigorous and detailed readings of the other twenty-five.
- engineer_22 3y agoWhat do you mean particularly?
- bavell 3y agoPerhaps there are important reasons why they are #1 and #2?
- birdofhermes 3y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights See the historical notes under proposal and ratification, in particular the table of article revisions approved in 1789. The order of ratification was contingent on a series of historical accidents and has little to do with Madison’s (or any other individual founder’s) intentions.
- leereeves 3y agoThe table "Approval of the Bill of Rights in Congress and the States" shows that the amendments are in the same order in the Bill of Rights as they were in Madison's original proposal, and all were ratified December 15, 1791. Some of his proposals were removed, though, and one of those was resurrected two hundred years later.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- sandspar 3y agoAre the other twenty-five under constant threat like the first two?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]