4. What are Civil Rights and what are Civil Liberties? Discuss the role of the Bill of Rights to these concept
99305
Civil liberties typically apply to individuals while civil rights apply to defined groups. The term civil liberties refers to protection from the arbitrary power of the state, and includes such rights as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and, debatably, the right to privacy. The two concepts are overlapping yet distinct—and thus the new inclusion of civil liberties under the rubric of civil rights rhetoric is far from trivial. Rather, it gives Democrats a pulpit from which to challenge the Bush administration on many fronts.
101487
CONSTITUTION and Bill of Rights OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS\n\nhttp://www.harbornet.com/rights/illinois.txt\n\nVoters Bill of Rights\n\nhttp://www.equipforequality.org/programs/votingrights/votersbill.php
606324
No.  That right is reserved for citizens and legal residents.\n\nThey do not have "civil rights."  They have "human rights."  This is an important distinction.  Also, to infer that the Constitution is bestowing rights on illegals is like assuming that illegals have the right to bear arms and vote.  "The people" in the Constitution very specifically means "the citizens" of the USA.\n\nWikipedia\nCivil Rights\nCivil rights are the protections and privileges of personal liberty given to all citizens by law. Civil rights are distinguished from "human rights" or "natural rights"—civil rights are rights that are bestowed by nations on those within their territorial boundaries, while natural or human rights are rights that many scholars claim ought to belong to all people.
40360
It is "the Bill of Rights" [not 'or"]\n\nThe first 10 Amendments to the US Constitution.  They were adopted at the same time as the Constitution, and enumerate individual and other rights reserved to the states, such as freedom of speech, religion, assembly (No. 1), right to bear arms (no. 2); freedom from unreasonable search and seizure (no. 4) etc.
241856
This may not be helpful for your homework, but it seems like ALL laws curtail personal freedoms, while being intended to protect society in some way.  It seems like the only laws that would NOT make your list would be laws that you believed were wrong because they actually did nothing useful to protect society.\n\nMaybe your teacher has something grander in mind, but from the way you described the question, it seems like you could pick any 4 traffic laws or parking ordinances even.
1042341
Just how do you figure it violates civil rights? A civil right is a right that is codified (written into law for you libs). The most famous example is the Civil Right Act of 1964 which bars discrimination based on race, creed, religion, national origin, etc. It has been amended many times, but it is still in effect. \n\nFor instance, you see news stories every now and then about airline flight attendants or waitresses being fired for gaining too much weight. Ever wonder why the courts uphold the firings? Because it is perfectly legal to discriminate based on weight.\n\nThere is plenty of discrimination that is legal. And last time I checked, gay marriage was not guaranteed by any law. As a matter of fact, many states have already added effective constitutional bans to gay marriage in their jurisdiction by defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
213693
A Civil right is a privilege which is given by a government. Citizenship is also a privilege. A privilege can be taking away. (Driving, voting, right to trial, freedom of speech, Ect...) National security is meaningless to a society that is oppressed by it's government.\n\nNow, the question you should be asking is! Is the general public educated enough to understand it's government or any relevant process. \n\nAlso, we can argue on an individuals ability to interpret information and reason accordingly. \nSo who should be making the "proper" decisions for the people?\n\nIs it a government represented by the people? But, what does representation mean! How are you represented? Can every person from every background, every community with different levels of intelligence and different ideals or lack of, be represented equally?
350343
The Bill of Rights are the original 10 amendments to the Constitution. The Founding Fathers felt uneasy as they thought their Constitution did not do enough to protect the basic Civil Liberties of the American people so they created the Bill of Rights (hence the name.) The Bill of Rights covers things like freedom of the press, right to trial, equal protection under the law, and the right to own a bear arms. The Federalist Papers are explanations written by the Founding Fathers in hope to clear up some of the incredibly vague language used.
49652
I'd say one was passage of the civil rights legislation in the 1960s. Delegates of a representative democracy (elected by a majority) voted for it.\n\nYou could extend that reasoning to cover everything from voting rights, to certain rights for illegal aliens, to SBA incentives for minorities to start businesses. \n\nI hope this is for school and you're cheating.
833412
There never was a such thing as privacy, Mack. The government has all kinds of information about you and I. As long as we have a social security number, the government can literally bring up a whole mountain of information on anybody in an instant. So, really the bill of rights protects civil liberties to an extent. You can say what you want as long as it is true, otherwise it's slander and you can be sued, and you can have the right to an attorney paid for by the courts, but you only get a public defender.
655777
Well, the civil war didn't end the attrocities being committed against blacks being treated as sub-humans.  I would hope that everyone would be educated about civil liberties which have been perverted by the left wing in this country.\n\nSamuel Adams said:\n\nAmong the rights of the colonists are these:\nfirst, to life; second, to liberty; third, to property; along with the right to support and defend them.\n\nCivil rights is one indicator of how civilized a nation is. Abortion is the most barbaric act against an innocent and helpless human being. In reality, and when compared to slavery, we are far more barbaric than 50 and 200 years ago.\n\nCivility and etiquette are not part of modern society. People of todays generation have perverted natural law and the meaning of civil liberties to mean selfishness. It is appauling and disgusting. When civil liberty is perverted to mean, "I can do whatever I want and have a right to privacy." we have totally ignored our civic duties. \n\nThis is a GOOD QUESTION! Civil rights go in a sequential order as Samuel Adams (father of the American revolution) expressed to the continental congress in 1772.  The recent Supreme Court decision is an example of how we are regressing in civil liberties. Quite often those who want to keep abortion legal would belittle what was written 200 years ago as if it has no relevance.  In effect, they want to play God!
843484
Yes - they are set out in the Bill of Rights and elsewhere in the US Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, and case decisions. There are also rights set out in the various state constitutions that may be stronger than the federal alws.\n\nMany of these rights apply only to government actions. Some also apply to private actions that affect the public.
959626
It guards against the "tyranny of the majority."\n\nIn other words, it specifies *limits* on what a government can do ... even a democratically elected government.  It recognizes that the majority is NOT always right.  That the majority of people in a population may support a law, and the majority of representatives may vote to pass a law, when that law is oppressive to a minority of individuals.\n\nIt gives an individual the basis on which to challenge an unjust act (such as an arrest, or the passage of a law) by the government.  If prosecuted and convicted by the government, the individual can appeal to the Supreme Court that the law itself violates the Constitution ... the Bill of Rights describes on what basis the constitutionality of the law can be challenged.
866971
You can't segregate the two, and know one should try. Nothing is more important to the citizens of this country than the Bill of Rights. However, some believe it is OK to take liberties in exchange for security, a concept that never works out for the citizens, and I disrespect people who agrees with it.
562800
Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure. \nThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. \n\nFifth Amendment – Due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, private property. \nNo person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. \n\nSixth Amendment – Trial by jury and other rights of the accused. \nIn all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.\n\nSeventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury. \nIn suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. \nEighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail, as well as cruel or unusual punishment. \nExcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. \n\nThese are all considered "criminal ammendments".\n\nRegards,\n\nArmus
106227
Gee, if there were only some kind of, oh I don't know, CONSTITUTION... or BILL OF RIGHTS.\nSeems like that would help.
598383
Here is material the National Parks Service has on teaching about the civil rights movement:\nhttp://www.teachingcivilrights.org/\n\nIn the case of history, much of it is driven by the textbook. Check out some elementary-level history books for an idea of the civil rights curriculum.