But they are in the constitution. They cost. They may not be under the rights section, but they cost money.
Also, you have the right to counsel. A cost.
Just because a couple of examples are not under the correct section, doesn't invalidate the argument. That's like taking some out on a technicality.
I just have to have one example to prove you incorrect. See above.
And all rights cost money. You need a part of government to define and protect rights. Thats not cheap. The irony is you cant have rights without a government and only that government can protect those rights.
There s a book that talks about this:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007G2BB1M/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 > The simple insight that all legally enforceable rights cost money reminds us that freedom is not violated by a government that taxes and spends, but requires it—and requires a citizenry vigilant about how money is allocated. Drawing from these practical, commonsense notions, The Cost of Rights provides a useful corrective to the all-or-nothing feel of much political debate nowadays (The Economist).
>Whittle away the dense academic prose, and the message of The Cost of Rights is disarmingly simple: as Robert A. Heinlein once put it, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch." If legal rights are to be considered meaningful, argue coauthors Stephen Holmes and Cass Sunstein, the existence of a government is required to first establish and then to enforce those rights. Running a government costs money; therefore, paying taxes is necessary in order to support the communal infrastructure that upholds individual rights. Each of the book's 14 chapters is essentially a variation on this theme, considering the proposition with regard to property rights, the effect of scarcity upon liberty, or the ways in which religious liberty contributes to social stability, all leading back to the conclusion that "government is still the most effective instrument available by which a politically charged society can pursue its common objectives, including the shared aim of securing the protection of legal rights for all."