I like living in Iowa except for this weather

Hence "All people are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights"

Right.

Modern Natural Rights theory tends to drop the "creator" (to be secular) but does hold that your rights are endowed by you being a conscious human.

in other words

Natural Rights.

You can deny god, but you can't deny nature.

Right. But Natural Rights are completely neglected in the Academies and alot of people don't really think that way anymore.

Which is where you get all sorts of nonsense from.

Damn shame, if you ask me.

It is.

It's actually a big part of how conservatives got exiled from the academies. Along with stuff like Military History.

yea even with my majors we didnt go nearly enough into Natural Rights

Military History is still a thing where i went

You get "conservative students" who go around "well, is it in the constitution" and "liberal students" who think that rights are merely legal or moral imperatives.

You went UVA, right?

(query for entries between [01/01/1601 00:00:00] and [08/29/2018 00:26:15] <--- this seems... excessive

no

idk if i want to say

Fair.

ive already revealed my state

Pratel

so i want to largely keep it at that

I'm calling bullshit.

the 10th Amendment takes the bill of rights out of the State's hands, verbatim.

Which is why, if challenged in court, the individual would win.

Everyone remembers amendment #1 and amendment #2

Anything that's not an amendment or a state law that doesn't go against the constitution

Is unconstitutional.

Everything left alone IS a right.

even if it's not outlined in the constitution

or a state constitution.

acorn vs jim
who wins?

You're arguing that because the bill of rights protects mostly individual rights that the individual would win over a state law that's inherently in contravention of the bill of rights.

That's a constitutional legal argument and you'd have an argument to make.

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.

But on my understanding of the history (as outlined in that page I gave you) is that it wasn't the accepted argument and still isn't.

I suppose the argument might've been, at the time, that the government, the bill of rights doesn't specifically tell the states, "now, states... Don't you do this...."

The government can takeaway your kids for what you say

and so they might've done it anyway.

Well, cps and dhs are pieces of shits in a few states. Like Oklahoma