Bill of Rights an afterthought?

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
  • #20672

    I’m having a discussion with a friend of mine who claims the US Bill of Rights was an afterthought:

    Read “The Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution.” Then read Madison’s notes from the Constitutional Convention, and for dessert follow up with Federalist #46. The Framers believed the Constitution was good enough to protect individual rights without having to enumerate them. The Framers spent the entire summer of 1787 drafting the Constitution without having to enumerate rights. As a matter of fact, every state delegation voted AGAINST a bill of rights during the convention. It wasn’t until after the convention dismissed that Mason, in a strategic move to guarantee some states’ ratification, agreed to add the Bill of Rights.

    I’m arguing against his position. I don’t remember the amendments being an afterthought. Admittedly, I haven’t started this course, but I did go through the US History course.

    Thoughts on his position?


    This question is considered at length in the lectures.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.