question for teachers about bill of rights

[scentopine]

8. I was taught using examples of British holding colonists in prison without trial

etc. i.e. by example.

I think you can teach words and ask them to memorize, but without historical context and cause and effect, it loses all meaning and significance.

If a law is passed that makes it legal to hold people indefinitely without trial in a military prison, isn't that more than just academic interpretation?

A while back I helped my kid research a unit that asked why we have bill of rights, specifically what policies by British motivated each of first ten amendments.

Part of that involved memorizing the first 10 amendments, however, to show that you understood the material, you had to provide context that demonstrated understanding.

There are recent factual examples that challenge the bill of rights, i.e. the bill of rights is less legal foundation and more political symbolism.

For example - is there really free speech? The US Government says no, there really isn't. Democrats and republicans both agree on this point.

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/21/convicted_for_words_not_deeds/

http://atheism.about.com/b/2003/12/24/free-speech-zones.htm

With civil rights movement from 1920s through 1970s, I don't recall any teacher staying neutral while teaching material about whether a black person should be able to order food in a restaurant or sit in any seat on the bus.

However, maybe things would be different today.