Originally Posted by lew
Anything can be legally changed in our Constitution. It is possible, though hardly feasible, that the Bill of Rights could be revoked. But the Bill of Rights don't give us rights - they merely spell out God-given rights that the Founding Fathers understood. This is the difference between our republic and a democracy.
I'll agree it hardly likely.
Originally Posted by lew
In a democracy, by a simple vote, 51% of the population could revoke the Bill of Rights.
I'm not sure on many nations where that is the case. Though in Australia the government would have to propose a change then at least 50% of each state would have to approve as well as 50% of the overall population.
44 proposals for constitutional amendment put to the people since federation. Only 8 have passed
Originally Posted by lew
In our republic, a very long process must be gone through before an amendment can be added that revokes the Bill of Rights. But even in the 0% chance of that happening, it still wouldn't revoke our actual rights. In a republic, especially ours, we recognize that we have a set of God-given, nature-given, whatever-given rights that are not granted by the government. Since they are not granted by the government, they likewise cannot be taken away.
There is no legal basis for this, it is merely an idea.
Originally Posted by lew
In a democracy, no understanding of this exists. It is simply, what 51% of the people say, 49% of the people must do. There are no God-given rights understood, there is no rule of law.
Well there is rule of law, and i'm pretty sure not everyone in the US sees rights as God-given.
In any case it is merely an argument of definition. I don't believe any sort of consensus can be found simply because I am using the popular definition, as well as the political concept.
In a democracy power is ultimately vested in the people (this may or may not allow 51% to control 49%), whereas you claim it is ultiamtely invested in God, though this isn't explictly started in the US constitution.