Shelbyville Times-Gazette

Amendment IX

Posted Thursday, January 10, 2008, at 11:17 PM
<< Previous | Read comments | Respond | Email link | Next >>

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

In my opinion, this Amendment means that the rights that are granted by the Constitution shall not infringe on other rights enjoyed by the people.

Comments
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

I am not quite sure I understand this one.

-- Posted by darrick_04 on Sun, Jan 13, 2008, at 9:58 AM

Basically what, in my opinion, this Amendment is saying is that the rights afforded you by the Constitution, aren't supposed to infringe on the rights of another.

-- Posted by Thom on Mon, Jan 14, 2008, at 12:20 AM

Ok so for instance, someone's right to bear arms shouldn't infringe on someone else's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? LOL... It just seems like a redundant amendment. But I nowhere near as smart as the founding fathers and I convinced they had great logic for passing this amendment. Again, thanks for the Amendment postings, as hopefully some who have never even taken the time to know them, can now get a few steps closer to really understanding the true definition of being an American. Ignorance of the laws, especially the most important ones is rampant in this country, I'm glad you are an educated citizen.

-- Posted by darrick_04 on Mon, Jan 14, 2008, at 6:18 AM

Thanks, Darrick. You know, the more that I think about this one, the more I'm confused. There does seem to be a paradox in that if one of my rights is dependant on you losing one of your rights, then I don't have that right. But this means that in order for you to enjoy that right, my original right has been infringed upon. If anyone else has a different interpretation of this Amendment, please enlighten me.

-- Posted by Thom on Mon, Jan 14, 2008, at 9:38 AM

I think Darrick might be fishing on his response to this one. He usually has a pretty good handle on these issues. Let's see.

My understanding of this one is that those specific rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are not all inclusive and there are other rights due a free people that may not be excluded simply because they are not specified in these ten.

This is where the role of the judiciary comes into play and whether we are on the conservative side or the liberal side we have to give preeminence to their adjudication of rights that are claimed but not found in the Bill of Rights. I think its an amazing document that established such a solid foundation at the beginning of our country but still left the opportunity for flexibility and interpretation as the country evolved.

-- Posted by devan on Mon, Jan 14, 2008, at 10:50 AM

Yup, indeed Devan, there is truly nothing like it. So long as we do not butcher it to the point of making it null and void.

Thanks for the clarification!

-- Posted by darrick_04 on Mon, Jan 14, 2008, at 10:56 AM

"there is truly nothing like it. So long as we do not butcher it to the point of making it null and void." --darrick_04

Amen...and this is what is currently being done.

-- Posted by Thom on Mon, Jan 14, 2008, at 12:43 PM