The Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution because they thought...?
367761
D. Federalists wanted a strong central government. Anti-Federalists wanted the individual states to have more power than the national government. The Constitution was very pro-federal government. Try reading the Federalist Papers (dry, sure, but fascinating if you take the time). Also check out the History Channel's show "10 Days that Unexpected Changed America" - the episode about Shay's Rebellion.\n\nMoseschung - good answer, except slavery DID concern them long before the Civil War. I'm reading Alexander Hamilton's biography by Ron Chernow, and slavery was a major sticking point between factions from the very beginning of this country.
1094411
Because they were both anti-federalists and thus opposed to large federal government in general.
136648
There were not enough Federalists in the congress to support the constitution
708485
Uh . . . Republican's hate guns?  I thought they were against gun control . . .
252068
No, it wouldn't. It was based on: IN GOD WE TRUST. Too bad others have come along and took what our forefathers had in mind when writing our constitution and twisted it. Too bad there is barely any freedoms left in this country to enjoy without being lashed out at against by some group or another. I wonder what our Founding Fathers would think of our "progress" if they could see us now?
45702
Because they ARE destroying the American way of life by destroying America a little at a time.\n\nThey treat the Consitution as if it were a sheet of disposable suggestions. But the Constitution is the LAW of the land!\n\nOnly one congressman always votes the Constitution: Ron Paul.\n\nBush has signed every piece of legislation that crossed his desk, all of which are UNconstitutional.
637173
A group of people living by our modern laws and morality might have been able to avoid the American Civil War.  I'm not sure that the people of the day could have come up with a solution.  The South wanted to secede because what the federal government was doing was going to destroy their economy.  It did, but a successful secession would have destroyed both economies.
464243
The Confederacy---most believe believe they stood for slavery, when in fact the common soldiers could  not even afford to own slaves, only the rich Southerners. They would not be willing to die for something they'd never even be able to have.  The everyday commoners fought for state's rights, which  is a better form of government in my opinion than a strong federal government because it is more localized and small scale.  Think about it....people in rural South Carolina have, on average, totally different beliefs and ways of life than people in Los Angeles or NYC.  We would've been much better off.
150605
I think we all need to go back and read the Constitution. Most of you who are against Christianity just go off the crap you hear from other people. Read it. You will find no trace of the words "Separation of Church and State". And to the question.... Because If we werent being persecuted we would have reason to doubt the word of God. Jesus who was ultimate as God and everything good was ultimately executed  in this world. Good and Godly things and people will always be persecuted. Yes our founding fathers found this country with the idea that the government wouldnt rule the church. Because that is what they escaped. Unfortunately many people twist and squeeze the actual words of the constitution and threaten them to say "freedom of religion, as long as youre not christian." Atheists are allowed to be atheists at school, work, and play. Minority religions are accepted. But christians...... we have to hide who we are at work, school, and any public facility. The truth is that nearly 87% of America claims christianity, but only around 12-14 percent agrees that Jesus is God. Or that there is an absolute truth. Or that Jesus not only redeems us but reigns over us. We are to take His yoke upon ourselves. Many "christians" have widely accepted the idea of being saved from hell but reject the idea of yielding their lives to His lordship. Sad, sad, tragedy it is. For those are the ones to whom will say "But I have done great works in your name" and He will say "Depart from me you workers of iniquity, I never knew you!"......
922515
Anti:\n\n1. Because it puts most of the power in the hands of the states.\n2. Because the powers of the federal Congress as specifically stated are few, if any\n3. Because the power to tax would be local, not national\n4. Because we wouldn't have all these political commercials on TV every four years
1045230
Nope! He is however trying to uphold what they stood for and what the many men that founded the constitution desired it to become.
953151
None it's all rhetoric.Even Bush said and i quote"Democrats will defend America,of course they will,just like Republicans"\nThe second responder deserves a reply\nAgainst the Patriot Act,patriot act is unconstitutional\nWant Geneva convention protection for terrorists,the US signed and was a co founder of that convention\nCan't listen to their phone calls,so protecting the constitutional rights is hating America now?Sounds weird to me\nCan't intercept their money transfers\n"We the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts--not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."\nAbraham Lincoln \n"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."\nBenjamin Franklin
800335
Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of men will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice, without constraint. -- Alexander Hamilton\n\nShays’ Rebellion had a lot to do with changing their minds.  Without a stronger “Union” they (United States) had little power to put down the uprising.\n\nOn the other hand, Confederations are very weak forms of government.  To put things into perspective, many confederations have been tried throughout world history, but none survive today.  The main reason is because states maintained their full sovereignty. Since they were all individual nations, there was little motivation for allegiance to each other.  This is especially true when it came to commerce among the states.  Also the articles were very limited when it came to what they regulated, and had definitive language that would prove to be obsolete over the years.  The Founders wanted something that would last.
839937
I think that if you change the constitution in any way to suit the terrorist threat then the terrorist have won. While maybe not a threat from this president it could be in the future and I know I would not like the gestapo knocking down my door and taking me away and locking me up without due process. This is an awful law and people who say it is all right to change the constitution are traitors to the American way of life. Our freedoms are precious and should not be written away without a fight. I hope that even with the Supreme court being a right wing majority that they will throw this law out as being what it is and that is unconstitutional.
421684
I'm confused.  Government supporters?  Are you talking about people who think government should fix everyone's problems?  Founding fathers would think they just want to go back to the days of tyranny over freedom.
594147
Are you moderate in supporting the Constitution? Left, right, up, down, middle - if you believe in compromising the Constitution, your rights, liberties and freedoms so you can be calmly in the middle, then I guess go ahead.\n\nI am adamantly opposed to governments growing beyond their authorized limits. About 2/3 of the federal budget is on unconstitutional expenditures. The government just passed that campaign finance reform bill that seriously attacked your 1st amendment rights. The government is failing to stop the influx of illegal aliens. The Constitution is either the law of the land, or it's a quaint historical document of no importance. There is no 'middle ground' there.\n\nI must disagree with your position. It's how we lost so many of our rights and freedoms in the first place.
975281
We've been told that it's to protect us in case the government tries to get a little too tyrannical. I guess the Bill of Rights also protects us from ourselves and some extremely intolerant and conservative people out there. The original writers of the Constitution didn't care for a Bill of Rights, but they had to add it to please some states so the states would join the union.