https://solomedicalsupply.com/2024/08/07/xx66kfjc 
https://homeupgradespecialist.com/jkbkjf7vy Madison made a major contribution to the ratification of the Constitution by writing, with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, the Federalist essays. In later years, when he was referred to as the “Father of the Constitution,” Madison protested that the document was not “the off-spring of a single brain,” but “the work of many heads and many hands.”
https://www.clawscustomboxes.com/q1mol1wwzfd In Congress, he helped frame the Bill of Rights and enact the first revenue legislation … (from whitehouse.gov).
https://udaan.org/kgirnfxywg.php As I mentioned yesterday, “there has been much discussion on conservative blogs about the difference between a republic and a democracy, and its implications for us in the USA.” The foundation of the discussion are the writings of President James Madison, in particular Federalist Paper No. 10. For instance:
https://merangue.com/34y4ovdfei8 This paper is considered an important document in American history for it lays out how the writers of the constitution defined the form of government that would protect minority rights from organized and united factions that intended to pass legislation injurious to the liberty of the minority or detrimental to the good of the country, (Tea Party 911).
This is actually an agreed upon interpretation of Federalist Paper No. 10 as seen in the lecture below from a college level course in a California college.
https://oevenezolano.org/2024/08/fv7e7a14 The problem, in a democracy, comes when a faction is more than 50%, because then it can vote in things that might be very harmful to the other 49%. This is sometimes referred to as “tyranny of the majority”, (De Anza College lecture).
Cheap Xanax China Interestingly enough, this has been being hooked lately with Federalist Paper No. 46 to argue that the majority should not attempt to limit the gun ownership rights of the minority with whom they disagree. But, my purpose is NOT to discuss gun rights, but rather minority rights.
You see, conservatives are actually agreeing that the rights of the minority need to be defended against the majority. As a Latino, I quite agree. And, let me say that this is the reason why various courts and the Supreme Court have ruled in favor of minority rights more than once over the decades.
Thus, Supreme Court rulings on equality of education, equal access to housing, the right to equal consideration in employment are all rulings that come directly out of President James Madison’s concern as stated in Federalist Paper No. 10. Particularly in the 20th and 21st centuries, the Supreme Court has ruled consistently that the majority does not have the right to deny education, housing, or employment to minorities. This is why—in general—affirmative action, the Americans with Disabilities Acts, equal housing initiatives, etc., have won judicial approval. It is because our Constitution has been set up in such a way that a tyranny of the majority can be undone.
When conservatives argue that only the legislature may enact solutions to problems, they are mistaken. The reason there are three branches of government is that the checks and balances are so designed as to try to prevent the tyranny of the majority, over the long run. So, when the legislature is unwilling to take action, there are times when the executive and judicial branches (often working in sync) can bring relief. And the same is true of each branch of government versus the other two. Thus, in the Watergate scandal, the legislative and judicial branches teamed up to ensure that the executive would not have its way. In each case, citizens are protected by two out of the three branches. It does not always work well, but it does work over the long run.
https://polyploid.net/blog/?p=cis0fx8q Ironically, some conservatives are beginning to talk about the ideology of a Republic to argue that President Obama is trying to impose the tyranny of the majority on the minority. Actually, conservatives try to make a two-fold argument. One is that the majority really does support them. The second is that we should not make law based on a temporary emotional spike by the majority. It is at this time that they cite Federalist Papers No. 10 & 46.
I actually welcome that. It is my hope that conservatives will look at their arguments and realize that these are our arguments (except that we would not cite paper no. 46). Latinos, African-Americans, people with disabilities, etc., would fully agree that part of the role of government is to ensure that the minority has full access to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
https://eloquentgushing.com/qf7hid4itlj So, I call upon conservatives to join with us in defense of the protection of minority rights. President James Madison would be proud of you. But, let me also speak directly to conservatives and say that when your best argument is that minority rights inconvenience you, then there is little defense for you in the writings of our Founding Fathers. When you say that you have somehow been “hurt” by an exercise of minority rights, you will find little defense in the Federalist Papers. The Bill of Rights and the Federalist Papers place this country firmly on the side of minority rights.
Of course, the question can come up as to whether there are limits to minority rights. Are there?
Leave a Reply