- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
The problem with a big democracy is that the elite’s will not be able to fully represent everyone. Elites do not appeal to the needs of everyone in the nation. As we grow more and more as a country in the future, it will be harder to equally represent everyone and know everyone that you are representing. Elites will become very detached from the needs of the different and large amount of people being represented.
The Bill of Rights would not only protect our individual rights but would also limit the amount of power the government would possess. It would guarantee that the peoples rights are safe and will not be infringed at all, no matter what. The system of checks and balances does not completely guarantee the possibility of one branch of government being more powerful than the other.
Standing armies take away liberty from the people. If they are used for tyrannical reasons no one will be able to stop them from harming the States. A militia will be much more organized and under strict direction from the people. They cost a lot less than standing armies as well.
Us Anti-federalists believe that the state courts will be nothing but "a clog upon the wheels in the government of the United States." The federal courts will work "to lessen and ultimately to subvert the state authority". When state courts are diminished, so is the ability of regular people to serve on juries and be tried by their peers. For example, Britain's government did not give fairly try people in court. People in America would be taken all the way back to Britain and would be shown no mercy in court. The federal government would also be too far away to understand the needs of the states. Therefore, they would not be able to make fair rulings in court like state courts would.
Necessary and Proper Clause
We Anti-Federalists think the idea of the Necessary and Proper Clause is ludicrous. This is just a way for the government to unfairly pass laws without the people’s say. It makes Congress the “supreme law of the land” and gives them “power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution, in the government of the United States; or in any department or office thereof.” (Brutus 2) This clause is very vague and this allows them room to pass any laws they deem necessary.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!