One reason why the antifederalist wanted a Bill of Rights is because it would be able to limit the power of the government. They believed if they gave too much power to the federal government, then it would turn into a monarchy, which was what they had originally broken away from. For example, amendment …show more content…
one states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof…”. This excerpt from the Bill of Rights shows how the amendment limits the government’s power by not allowing them to make any law regarding a certain religion. While this is done in multiple other countries, the United States is an exception and admits any type of religion. Additionally, the amendment 4 also say, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, house, paper, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated…”. This portion of the Bill of Rights explains that no person has the right to go into your house and steal your belongings without a warrant. Therefore, this amendment is limiting the government in being able to enter a person’s house freely and being able to take their effects.
Another reason why antifederalist wanted a Bill of Rights is because they feared a strong central government.
Similar to what was said before, a strong central government in Europe had led to their being a king that ruled them all, which accordingly is the opposite of what the Americans now want. To illustrate, amendment 10 declares, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This quote from the Bill of Rights describes how any powers not given to the federal government are given to the state government. Consequently, this is giving more power to the states, which is what the antifederalist desire, and takes away power from the central government, which reveals their fear of a strong central government. Moreover, amendment 2 proclaims, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This section of the Bill of Rights exhibits how the colonist were so afraid of the British, who indeed were a strong central government, that they were allowed weapons to keep themselves from …show more content…
harm.
A final reason why antifederalist wanted a Bill of Rights is because it would protect basic rights.
When under the rule of the king, the colonists were not secured with basic rights. However, under the new government being created, they wanted it to be confirmed that the basic rights would be protected. To demonstrate, amendment 3 announced, “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner…”. This component explains how soldiers used to be able to live in other citizen’s houses, despite any objections from the citizen. Furthermore, this protects people’s privacy against troops, which is something not provided to them while in Britain. Likewise, amendment 9 states, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not to be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” This portion of the Bill of Rights shows even if certain rights are not listed on the constitution, they are still authorized for all
citizens.
In the end, the Bill of Rights was not added to the Constitution, despite all of the antifederalist that wanted it to be. Although, after the Constitution was signed, the first thing done was producing a Bill of Rights, relenting to the antifederalist’s wishes. It ended up becoming a comprise by the two, making most people pleased with their new government.