Which Rights simply don't matter anymore?

Please list your Rights (by number is fine) in order of importance to you. Desending order from most important to least.
Please list any you feel are no longer valid, and should not longer be backed by the full weight of law, or should be revoked or rescinded. (Please list reasons for these choices.)
This is a serious question, for serious discussion, so please keep it on track. If this goes sideways, I will delete it.

 

could you go 1st so we have an example?

 

Freedom of speech you can say what you want your still going to be held accountable for what you say.

 

Good question because @kellory could be talking about Declaration of Independence or Declaration of the Rights of Man or something totally different. But then I cannot imagine some simply not mattering because behind every one is history and history matters.

 

Stick to the bill of Rights, and the Constitution.

 

So, as far as constitutionally dictated rights, I would start with the right to bear arms. I think other rights are G-d given and stem from the fact that we can (1) defend ourselves and (2) revolt against tyranny. I think freedom of speech and conscience would be second. I think I'd include due process/innocent until proven guilty/trial by jury/speedy trial third. I expect that search and seizure would be tied with freedom of movement.

 

I still don't know what you are asking for Kellory.... example please?

 

I'm getting pressed for time right now, but I'll list a few:
Amendments 1,2 4,5, & 6--first. But I'd rank them 2,1, 4, 5, & 6.

 

Says the white male.....

^^ said with love, affection and sarcasm.

 

As an example:
The Third Amendment (Amendment III) to the United States Constitution places restrictions on the quartering of soldiers in private homes without the owner's consent, forbidding the practice in peacetime."

Is it still valid or any less valid than it was the day it was inscribed? Do you see any reason to allow this right to weaken or be done away with? Is it still of importance and if so where would it rank?

 

The 2nd is number one.

 

I have no use for the one on prohibition, which was repealed, but the rest are all necessary, and not to be trifled with.
The second is the prime, without it, all the others are at the mercy of the government.

 

I do not think that the order or importance of the first ten defined rights have changed and unfortunately we may well have a definition problem with the 3 rd now. In their days, the state quartering troops in your house and requiring you to feed them was about the only infringement on your rights to control your property. Now then can take you water rights, require a license to sell your goods, require building permits and control your "improvements", confiscate it with property taxes and fees, tell you who you can rent to, and we could go for hundreds of other infringements to the third. All of the amendments were broadly written to create a framework that would insure that broad right. We have lost the third and the powers that be never allowed it to be developed, all the rest are in serious trouble. The only real change is that the loss of the 10 th, state rights, has changed the nature of our government and created a central big government and with the development of the cults of personality, bureaucracy and political ideology that now dominate the central government, it leaves the local governments, only the powers that they wish the states to have, within a framework controlled by the central government. The tail is truly wagging the dog.

 

Since the Constitution and the Bill of Rights only enumerates rights that are God-given to all men, I am going to have to say they are all important and cannot be trifled with.

 

I like the discussion. I wouldn't change the bill of rights. I feel the founding fathers had a reason for their decision making. I'm pretty open minded, but I don't think most of us can aspire to the intelligence that put that document together. There's a complicated procedure to change the document, and I think there's a reason for that.

 

they're fine the way they are.... although where the 2nd is concerned any change IMHO would be "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." is all that is really needed. The militia part would be something like "For in this manner may they defend themselves, their families, homes, communities, nation, and constitution in the form of a militia" ?

 

This is a very, VERY good question and it deserves consideration in its answer however I cannot respond this evening and would like time to refresh my memory and read the Constitution and Bill of Rights prior to answering. But, frankly, I doubt there is much to change or much I would let go...we'll see.