Anonymous #2 4d

“Are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights”

3

Anonymous #3 4d

that’s in the declaration of independence, pal. you didn’t even quote the document we’re talking about. and the unalienable rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. the constitution is just how the government is to be set up and what powers each branch has. the amendments limit those powers to protect its citizens.

3

Anonymous #2 4d

it’s the most fundamental idea that every law, clause, and amendment is based on. the amendments aren’t an extra paid DLC to unlock new privileges. and by the way a lot of the amendments are about rights (i.e. The Bill of Rights), not just organizing the branches or setting term limits. If you don’t like it then leave brochacho.

1

Anonymous #2 4d

no, you’re right. These are all completely different documents about different countries written by completely different people. It’s impossible to infer what one group of authors would’ve thought about another. Apples vs oranges type shit.

1

Anonymous #3 4d

fundamentally, the rights we exercise are limits on government power, i never said the amendments were about branches or setting term limits, i said the constitution was. i said that to differentiate the relatively subjective declaration of independence (that you brought up for some reason) to the extremely objective constitution and amendments. it makes zero sense for people who are not US citizens to receive amendments. yes, an illegal person deserves life, liberty (due process) and pt. 1

1

Anonymous #3 4d

the pursuit of happiness (the ability to enter the country legally)

1

Anonymous #2 4d

The founders believed in the enlightenment idea of “natural rights” that’s shown in the constitution and Declaration of Independence. Amendments to the constitution like the 14th explicitly make distinctions between “people” and “citizens”. If you don’t believe natural rights are god given or natural then the post probably isn’t about you.

11