Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
Maybe so, he was still correct, the debate about the Bill of Rights at the time was the Federalist saying it wasn't necessary and would imply that other rights were not protect while the anti-federalists thought they were necessary because the lack of them would imply that we didn't have them.
https://billofrightsinstitute.org/primary-sources/bill-of-rights
https://blog.acton.org/archives/994...5kf__R3CC34g15gNr7EOAc6G6KxEI-axoCkIMQAvD_BwE
https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1184/federalists
Almost anything you can find on the debate over the bill of rights say the same thing.
And as I previously wrote and which I just reposted, I am not arguing with thatpoint. I wrote: " The opposition to a Bill of Rights was because they feared any rights specifically not enumerated would, by default, NOT be rights. Therefore, Madison included that Rights were not restricted only to those in the B of R in the 9th Amendment ."
What he is not correct about is because some FF's feared people would think rights didn't come from a Creator/ nature.