Similarities Between Federalist And Anti-Federalists

981 Words4 Pages
ne of the many points of disagreement between Federalists and Anti-Federalists was the Constitution’s lack of a bill of rights. Federalists argued that the Constitution did not need a bill of rights, because the people and the states kept any powers not given to the federal government. Anti-Federalists held that a bill of rights was necessary to safeguard individual liberty .Fearing centralization of power in the national government, the Antifederalists set about a strong propaganda campaign, pointing to the absence of guarantees of freedoms in the constitution. The First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;…show more content…
Admitted by the Second Continental Congress the Northwest Ordinance stated, "Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged." (The Northwest Ordinance) The First Amendment contains two clauses about the Freedom of Religion. The first part is known as the Establishment Clause, and the second as the Free Exercise Clause. The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from passing laws that will establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. The Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government from interfering with a person’s practice of his or her religion.Freedom of religion lets American Citizens have the freedom to attend a church, mosque, synagogue, temple, or other house of worship of their choice. They can also choose to not be involved in any religion as well. Because of the First Amendment, we can practice our religion, however we want to. However, religious actions and rituals can be limited by civil and federal laws of seemed to be…show more content…
Back then there was no right to free assembly specified in the Magna Carta, the Petition of Right and the English Bill of Rights. Either way many Englishmen often assembled to discuss their political grievances . These gatherings were risky propositions. As in other monarchies, any meeting that was held was not only subject to suppression, but could also be interpreted as a treasonous act. Freedom of assembly means American citizens have the right to come together in private and public gatherings.Madison had also proposed that "the people shall not be restrained from peaceably assembling and consulting for their common good; nor from applying to the Legislature by petitions, or remonstrances, for redress of their grievances."(First Amendment) Citizens can join groups for religious, social, recreational, or political reasons. The government may prohibit people from knowingly associating in groups that engage and promote illegal activities. The government will only protect those peaceful gatherings because once violence is started riots begin to form and the police will have to intervene. Freedom of assembly is generally recognized as one of the foundations of a democratic nation. It is also crucial to the development and expression of culture. By organizing in order to act on a common idea and accomplish a common goal, American citizens can more
Show More
Related

  • Similarities Between The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    581 Words  | 3 Pages

    different debates that occurred in order to shape the U.S. One debate was between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The debate was concerning the ratification of the Constitution. The Federalists were a group of people that supports the ratification of the new Constitution. The Anti-Federalists were a group of people that opposed the new Constitution. Alexander Hamilton was the leader of the Federalist Party. The Federalists felt like there was no need of the Bill of Rights because it would limit

    Read More

  • English Bill Of Rights

    1254 Words  | 6 Pages

    Bill of Rights Governments seek to protect the rights of its people. Between The English Bill of Rights (1689) and The U.S Bill of Rights (1791) both had the same overlapping principles of limiting the powers of the government and to provide its people with individual liberties. Although they are both fundamental documents both countries differed in form and purpose. The U.S enacted a formal statement of Fundamental rights of the people of the United States and integrated it into the Constitution

    Read More

More about Similarities Between Federalist And Anti-Federalists

Open Document