Assignment 3: North America
The Bill of Rights 2.0
Adam Dastrup:
"For this assignment, you will need to rewrite the Bill of Rights into a way you would say it in 2012 rather than 1789 when written by James Madison."
A Rejuvenated Bill of Rights, from the Post-modern Era
Improvement 1:
The bicameral legislature, containing the House of Representatives and the Senate, is not constitutionally allowed to establish any law (“binding or enforceable rule”—Encarta Dictionary) that relates to the practice, study, or institution of any religious body. Nor is Congress permitted to hinder any religion’s observance, in the various manners upon which this action is taken. Furthermore, Congress may not inhibit the necessary and essential right of citizens and non-citizens of the United States of America to profess their respective opinions and passions via the exercise of speech, the press, non-violent assembly, and the appeal of the government for the remedy of its injustices.
Improvement 2:
A valiant, proud, and well-organized militia (“a body of citizens organized in a paramilitary group and typically regarding themselves as defenders of individual rights against the presumed interference of the federal government”) is secured as a right of the people. This is vital, so that the freedoms of our Nation and its individual States are safeguarded. Moreover, when regarding this notion specifically, the people are thoroughly granted permission to possess and maintain possession of weapons, for the safety and welfare of each member of our Nation.
Improvement 3:
During periods in time in which no wars involving the U.S. are occurring, soldiers are not to be lodged in any place of residence in which the owner has not agreed to such an arrangement. This is the same case for wartime. Only the rule of law can assure that this accommodation may happen.
Improvement 4:
Our people are ensured the right to keep their belongings free from unprovoked examination and confiscation. Search warrants may only be utilized when just cause is found, affirmed by a vow of respect toward the owner(s) of such personal items, including one’s own body.
Improvement 5:
Only by presence and summons of a carefully selected jury (defined by the Encarta Dictionary as “a group of people, usually 12 people, chosen to give a verdict on a legal case that is displayed before them in a court of law”) can a person, in a situation abiding law, be kept behind to give explanation for a heinous crime s/he possibly committed. There lies an exception when military concerns are involved, and there seems to be an instance of real public endangerment therein. It is also not permissible to include or indict any person two times for the same transgression, in which case s/he would be subject to peril regarding his/her sustaining of life and physical body. Herewith, such a person who may have perpetrated said offense, need not speak openly on his/her actions (or lack thereof) in the midst of a criminal case. Deprivation of the rights to one’s own existence, autonomy, or goods—without the prescribed and measured progression of the rules of governance—is prohibited. Lastly, private property will not be seized for use by the community, without fair payment toward the owner, for such a deed.
Improvement 6:
In the duration of criminal trials, the defendant is to be given the right to experience an expedited and public prosecution, in which an unbiased panel (jury) participates and makes informed, well-deliberated decisions. The members of such a jury have to be from the state and district where the offense was performed—a district that has been briefed on the many factors involved in the accusation. The suspect needs to be offered exposure to the witnesses set against him, and be given the chance to find witnesses who can testify on his side. S/he may obtain a legal counselor (attorney) to better aid him/her in this due process of law.
Improvement 7:
In common-law cases, in which the expense of such a process is deemed expensive in all considerations of overall monetary value, the right of trial by jury need be maintained. In addition, no issue evaluated by such a jury is allotted authorization to be reopened in any U.S. court—other than as dictated by the collective regulations already established.
Improvement 8:
Undue or disproportionate bail (Encarta: “a sum of money deposited to secure an accused person's temporary release from custody and to guarantee that person's appearance in court at a later date. If the person fails to appear in court on the date set, the money is forfeited”) will not be a requisite demanded of any persons. Otherwise excessive fines, or strange or malicious penalties, are forbidden from enactment.
Improvement 9:
The account of the Constitution withstanding, of specifically affirmed and basic rights, will not be interpreted to refute or ridicule other rights reserved by the people.
Improvement 10:
The United States’ ability to make laws and adhere to the Constitution is to be kept and not restricted by the States in question, or the people within.
Improvement 1:
The bicameral legislature, containing the House of Representatives and the Senate, is not constitutionally allowed to establish any law (“binding or enforceable rule”—Encarta Dictionary) that relates to the practice, study, or institution of any religious body. Nor is Congress permitted to hinder any religion’s observance, in the various manners upon which this action is taken. Furthermore, Congress may not inhibit the necessary and essential right of citizens and non-citizens of the United States of America to profess their respective opinions and passions via the exercise of speech, the press, non-violent assembly, and the appeal of the government for the remedy of its injustices.
Improvement 2:
A valiant, proud, and well-organized militia (“a body of citizens organized in a paramilitary group and typically regarding themselves as defenders of individual rights against the presumed interference of the federal government”) is secured as a right of the people. This is vital, so that the freedoms of our Nation and its individual States are safeguarded. Moreover, when regarding this notion specifically, the people are thoroughly granted permission to possess and maintain possession of weapons, for the safety and welfare of each member of our Nation.
Improvement 3:
During periods in time in which no wars involving the U.S. are occurring, soldiers are not to be lodged in any place of residence in which the owner has not agreed to such an arrangement. This is the same case for wartime. Only the rule of law can assure that this accommodation may happen.
Improvement 4:
Our people are ensured the right to keep their belongings free from unprovoked examination and confiscation. Search warrants may only be utilized when just cause is found, affirmed by a vow of respect toward the owner(s) of such personal items, including one’s own body.
Improvement 5:
Only by presence and summons of a carefully selected jury (defined by the Encarta Dictionary as “a group of people, usually 12 people, chosen to give a verdict on a legal case that is displayed before them in a court of law”) can a person, in a situation abiding law, be kept behind to give explanation for a heinous crime s/he possibly committed. There lies an exception when military concerns are involved, and there seems to be an instance of real public endangerment therein. It is also not permissible to include or indict any person two times for the same transgression, in which case s/he would be subject to peril regarding his/her sustaining of life and physical body. Herewith, such a person who may have perpetrated said offense, need not speak openly on his/her actions (or lack thereof) in the midst of a criminal case. Deprivation of the rights to one’s own existence, autonomy, or goods—without the prescribed and measured progression of the rules of governance—is prohibited. Lastly, private property will not be seized for use by the community, without fair payment toward the owner, for such a deed.
Improvement 6:
In the duration of criminal trials, the defendant is to be given the right to experience an expedited and public prosecution, in which an unbiased panel (jury) participates and makes informed, well-deliberated decisions. The members of such a jury have to be from the state and district where the offense was performed—a district that has been briefed on the many factors involved in the accusation. The suspect needs to be offered exposure to the witnesses set against him, and be given the chance to find witnesses who can testify on his side. S/he may obtain a legal counselor (attorney) to better aid him/her in this due process of law.
Improvement 7:
In common-law cases, in which the expense of such a process is deemed expensive in all considerations of overall monetary value, the right of trial by jury need be maintained. In addition, no issue evaluated by such a jury is allotted authorization to be reopened in any U.S. court—other than as dictated by the collective regulations already established.
Improvement 8:
Undue or disproportionate bail (Encarta: “a sum of money deposited to secure an accused person's temporary release from custody and to guarantee that person's appearance in court at a later date. If the person fails to appear in court on the date set, the money is forfeited”) will not be a requisite demanded of any persons. Otherwise excessive fines, or strange or malicious penalties, are forbidden from enactment.
Improvement 9:
The account of the Constitution withstanding, of specifically affirmed and basic rights, will not be interpreted to refute or ridicule other rights reserved by the people.
Improvement 10:
The United States’ ability to make laws and adhere to the Constitution is to be kept and not restricted by the States in question, or the people within.
Reflection
1. Describe how this assignment has enhanced your views of your rights as an American?
2. Explain how completing this assignment has changed your views about your American rights.
3. How might this assignment and or the discussion on “What It Means to Be an American” change your views about American politics, the judicial system, or opposing viewpoints on what it means to be an American?
This project helped me to remember and become refreshed on the intrinsically appealing and edifying nature of being an American who is granted such specific and (occasionally) bolstered rights. Though I had been able to recall a few of the Amendment rights and their corresponding numbers off the top of my head, it goes to show how quickly we can forget our basic rights while we live in and argue about the country we inhabit! Bill Maher, an American comedian, said it well: “We have the Bill of Rights. What we need is a Bill of Responsibilities.” Indeed, it is just as much my responsibility as the next U.S. citizen’s to involve myself in the advancement and overall needs of our once-great Nation that has never truly realized its potential. For goodness’ sake, what is America without its voting participants! Certainly, I am of age. I am almost 20, as a matter of fact. So why do I sit around and choose little to no side regarding the pressing political issues, and yet consider myself educated? Yes, education maybe in terms of the Humanities—but where the Political Sciences are concerned, forget it! I may have taken A.P. U.S. History in high school, as well as American Civilization last semester, but how have I applied its teachings? Only to the extent of their apparent use to me. And that is a sad fact.
In the end, I hope to somehow make a positive change in the ways of progressively furthering America’s rights, and the recognition of such rights therewith. I will take up the task by becoming and acting in the capacity of a teacher, whether in the high-school realm or in collegiate pursuits, and hopefully will, before such a time, join the Peace Corps. It is something I have wanted to go after for a couple of years now, I am determined to allow my passion for Humanitarian efforts drive me forward.
Formerly, I considered “(my) American rights” to be granted automatically to me, at my own leisure. Now, I know that is not the case. In all actuality, our Founding Fathers (especially, in the case of the original author of the Bill of Rights, James Madison) endured much internal and external turmoil in order to be able to grant us these freedoms, of which we so take advantage on a daily basis. The fact that I know better now that my personal possessions (including my “person”—or physical body) cannot be searched or taken without probable cause, and that I can sincerely act as my own advocate in a court a law, upon which occasion I may be accused of an “infamous” crime: this reality is a more brilliantly alarming one than I have ever known.
“Cruel or unusual punishment”? Now I have a more refined context upon which to ground my anticipations of that which may be permissible in any given situation within the country I claim as my own. I know that the many historical figures who did not experience such freedoms from harsh and undue forms of consequences—women such as Joan of Arc and Anne Hutchinson, and men such as Galileo Galilee—may have led less tumultuous lives had they a Constitution such as ours to protect them from harm. But they did not, sad to say. However, they act now to us Americans, and members of other equal-rights-aspiring nations, as beacons of light and hope for a better future.
My rights are not solely mine. They are every Americans’, for the benefit of the whole. Opposing viewpoints on being an American simply challenge Americans, themselves, to take a better look at the freedoms of which we so greatly and often take advantage. For the security of our life, liberty, and property, we must remember to embrace others' voicing of their opinions as exercises of the Bill of Rights and the following Amendments, as facets of the American psyche and overall idealism that characterizes our feuding nation. Thank you, John Locke, for your wisdom. Good lookin’ out.
2. Explain how completing this assignment has changed your views about your American rights.
3. How might this assignment and or the discussion on “What It Means to Be an American” change your views about American politics, the judicial system, or opposing viewpoints on what it means to be an American?
This project helped me to remember and become refreshed on the intrinsically appealing and edifying nature of being an American who is granted such specific and (occasionally) bolstered rights. Though I had been able to recall a few of the Amendment rights and their corresponding numbers off the top of my head, it goes to show how quickly we can forget our basic rights while we live in and argue about the country we inhabit! Bill Maher, an American comedian, said it well: “We have the Bill of Rights. What we need is a Bill of Responsibilities.” Indeed, it is just as much my responsibility as the next U.S. citizen’s to involve myself in the advancement and overall needs of our once-great Nation that has never truly realized its potential. For goodness’ sake, what is America without its voting participants! Certainly, I am of age. I am almost 20, as a matter of fact. So why do I sit around and choose little to no side regarding the pressing political issues, and yet consider myself educated? Yes, education maybe in terms of the Humanities—but where the Political Sciences are concerned, forget it! I may have taken A.P. U.S. History in high school, as well as American Civilization last semester, but how have I applied its teachings? Only to the extent of their apparent use to me. And that is a sad fact.
In the end, I hope to somehow make a positive change in the ways of progressively furthering America’s rights, and the recognition of such rights therewith. I will take up the task by becoming and acting in the capacity of a teacher, whether in the high-school realm or in collegiate pursuits, and hopefully will, before such a time, join the Peace Corps. It is something I have wanted to go after for a couple of years now, I am determined to allow my passion for Humanitarian efforts drive me forward.
Formerly, I considered “(my) American rights” to be granted automatically to me, at my own leisure. Now, I know that is not the case. In all actuality, our Founding Fathers (especially, in the case of the original author of the Bill of Rights, James Madison) endured much internal and external turmoil in order to be able to grant us these freedoms, of which we so take advantage on a daily basis. The fact that I know better now that my personal possessions (including my “person”—or physical body) cannot be searched or taken without probable cause, and that I can sincerely act as my own advocate in a court a law, upon which occasion I may be accused of an “infamous” crime: this reality is a more brilliantly alarming one than I have ever known.
“Cruel or unusual punishment”? Now I have a more refined context upon which to ground my anticipations of that which may be permissible in any given situation within the country I claim as my own. I know that the many historical figures who did not experience such freedoms from harsh and undue forms of consequences—women such as Joan of Arc and Anne Hutchinson, and men such as Galileo Galilee—may have led less tumultuous lives had they a Constitution such as ours to protect them from harm. But they did not, sad to say. However, they act now to us Americans, and members of other equal-rights-aspiring nations, as beacons of light and hope for a better future.
My rights are not solely mine. They are every Americans’, for the benefit of the whole. Opposing viewpoints on being an American simply challenge Americans, themselves, to take a better look at the freedoms of which we so greatly and often take advantage. For the security of our life, liberty, and property, we must remember to embrace others' voicing of their opinions as exercises of the Bill of Rights and the following Amendments, as facets of the American psyche and overall idealism that characterizes our feuding nation. Thank you, John Locke, for your wisdom. Good lookin’ out.