Go Back   Suijuris Forums > Articles > Articles & News
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-21-2007, 12:43 PM
weishaupt1776's Avatar
weishaupt1776 weishaupt1776 is offline
The Outta Commissiona
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Florida Republic
Posts: 5,263
U.S. Judges Kill the Ninth Amendment

March 20, 2007



As reported by the Associated Press, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed on March 14, 2007 that the Ninth Amendment to the United States is now null and void, and that the federal government of the United States of America has no moral legitimacy.

The judges did not explicitly express those statements in their ruling, but that is the implication. The case involved a woman whose life, according to her doctor, can only be preserved with medical marijuana. The judges ruled that the federal government may nevertheless prosecute her for violating federal laws regarding drugs.

The defendant lives in Oakland, California, a state which has legalized the use of medical marijuana for patients with a doctor’s prescription for it. As reported, her illnesses include scoliosis (a spine problem) and a brain tumor. She suffers from chronic nausea, and sued the federal government to prevent being arrested for using medical marijuana to treat her pain and to maintain her appetite.

The U.S. Supreme Court had already ruled that medical marijuana users could be convicted for violating federal marijuana laws even if legal by state law. Therefore, the specific issue in this case was whether the U.S. Constitution recognizes a natural right to life as an unenumerated right recognized by the Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That Amendment states, in its entirety, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The meaning of the Ninth Amendment is that there are rights that people have which are not created by the constitution but precede it, and these rights are recognized by the U.S. Constitution just as much as rights such as free speech that are “enumerated” or explicitly stated. The supreme natural right of a person is the right to live and to protect one’s own life. If this supreme right is “disparaged,” hence ignored or disregarded, or denied, then no other rights have meaning.

The judges ruled that the defendant could be prosecuted by the federal government. They ruled that the right to life is not implicit in the Constitution, which implies that these judges disparage and deny the Ninth Amendment itself. This judgment has killed the Ninth Amendment. That section of the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution is now null and void, no longer recognized by the federal judiciary.

The fundamental moral purpose and authority of government is to protect life and liberty. Of course actual governments are not really created to protect life, property, or liberty, but to seize and use power. But morally, the use of government to murder, steal, and destroy is no different from individuals doing this. Government is morally justified not by democracy or a constitution or religious authority but only from enforcing a rule of law that protects human rights. In the United States, the heart and soul of the U.S. Constitution has been the Ninth Amendment, which recognizes all our natural rights, and explicitly prohibits the federal government from denying and disparaging these rights.

Of course the U.S. and other governments routinely violate human or natural rights. But at least their constitutional authority comes from their promise to protect rights. But now the judges of the federal judiciary say that the U.S. Constitutional protection of human rights is now dead. Let us mark and commemorate March 14, 2007, in our calendars as the day that the judges killed the Ninth Amendment. They murdered the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, the spirit of liberty.

Let us commemorate March 14 as the date that the U.S. government lost its remaining moral authority. Congress is at fault for enacting laws that violate the Ninth Amendment, but the way the U.S. government works is by the judicial branch of government having the last say, overruling laws that violate the Constitution. The last nail in the coffin of liberty is the judicial decision to kill the Ninth Amendment.

Where does that leave American citizens? We no longer have a real rule of law, but a rule of men who can decide what portions of the constitution to live by and which to disparage. How can U.S. officials fight against terrorists who murder people if the U.S. government murders by denying people with grave illnesses the means of avoiding death?

An ancient Egyptian poet wrote:

To whom can I speak today?
The land is left to those who do wrong.
To whom can I speak today?
The sin that afflicts the land, It has no end.

Has humanity learned nothing about morality and governance since ancient times?

This article first appeared in the Progress Report, www.progress.org. Reprinted with permission.

Dr. Fred Foldvary teaches economics at Santa Clara University and is the author of several books: The Soul of Liberty, Public Goods and Private Communities, and the Dictionary of Free-Market Economics.
__________________
Quit Walking Around Like a Half Breed Freeman Find Out How

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Pitts
The whole system is based upon a 'presumption' that something was represented to have occurred which may or may not have occurred in the manner which has been represented.

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro -Hunter S. Thompson
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-21-2007, 12:46 PM
weishaupt1776's Avatar
weishaupt1776 weishaupt1776 is offline
The Outta Commissiona
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Florida Republic
Posts: 5,263
Could it possibly be that a 14th Amendment citizen has no protection under the 9th Amendment?

Plus the state is no longer sovereign under that amendment?

The 2007 Edition of The Red Amendment would clear these issues up for a lot of people http://www.pacinlaw.org/index/red_amendment.php, but most choose to ignore the problem

Most are just happy being the "Abused Citizen", complain and do nothing. A very sad commentary.


Think about every court case being of a specific nature and not necessarily applicable to someone else's situation (i.e. one who has corrected their nationality)
__________________
Quit Walking Around Like a Half Breed Freeman Find Out How

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Pitts
The whole system is based upon a 'presumption' that something was represented to have occurred which may or may not have occurred in the manner which has been represented.

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro -Hunter S. Thompson
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-21-2007, 03:06 PM
Livefire's Avatar
Livefire Livefire is online now
Come and Get Some!
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,373
Not to mention the 8th amendment in this particular case.....Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted

I would consider the choice obey the so-called "law" and suffer the indignity of a pain filled, shortened exisitence OR rightly tell these bastards where to go and get what you need to help mediate the pain and play a cat and mouse game and hope you dont get busted. Even the Good Book doesnt prohibit reefer or any other agent used for pain relief in people who are seriously, or terminally ill..............

Pro 31:6 Give strong drink to him who is ready to perish, and wine to those who are of heavy hearts.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-10-2007, 12:38 PM
dragonriot dragonriot is offline
Waking Up
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6
Sounds to me like the judges have only deemed that the Preamble to the Constitution does not apply to 14th Amendment Citizens because it is a Federal Court, and there is no Preamble to the Federal Constitution. I may be completely off on this, but in the Preamble, it says these rights are self-evident, the rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. If the Preamble applied in Federal Court, the charges against the woman would have been dropped before it ever made it to Federal Court... I.E. if she were to exercise her right to show legal precedence for the use of the Preamble, she would have won.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-10-2007, 02:43 PM
mrg's Avatar
mrg mrg is offline
Come and Get Some!
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Illinois Republic
Posts: 3,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonriot
in the Preamble, it says these rights are self-evident, the rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

That is from the Unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to Kill Robocops rottweiler Videos 0 02-23-2007 12:26 AM
Cops: Mom says 'demons' drove her to kill Archibald 'Harry' Tuttle Office of Information Retrieval 2 11-17-2006 08:10 AM
The Forgotten Ninth Amemdment fulltitle Court 3 10-10-2006 07:13 AM
To Kill an American aksis Misc. Discussion 2 06-05-2006 08:19 AM
"A Time to Kill" vs "Though Shall Not Kill" BoyntonStu Religion 40 12-25-2004 08:55 AM

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
2003-2007 Copyright by Law Research Group, LLC Terms of Use | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Notice/Disclaimer