What you are suggesting is the federal government has the authority to "force" the States to follow what they say they must do regarding rights (which allows the federal government to determine what rights and definitions can be) and you are suggesting that the responsibility is not in the hands of the people at the State level. This concept is something the progressives love ever since the Civil War. According to the Left the States stopped being autonomous at the time following the Civil War. The thinking was they misbehaved, so the federal government must control them and make sure they don't dare misbehave again. This allowed progressivism a foot in the door. You have bought into propaganda, and your response used the courts as a support for your argument. The courts are a large part of the problem, and the catalyst behind pushing the agenda to allow the federal government to eliminate State sovereignty. As I said in the last email, regardless of Bingham's and the courts' opinions, the overall concensus was that, as the founders originally intended, the Bill of Rights must not be applied to the States for it opened the door for the federal government to "control" the States. That does not mean those rights are no longer rights, it means that the federal government could not "force" the States to follow their definitions of rights, and that the people must stand up, through their involvement and their State constitutions, for their rights. The rights belong to the people, not the federal government, so it is up to the people to defend them.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights to the States as per the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment - Political Pistachio