Second Rewrite:

The United States should no longer be utilizing that Old World political spectrum developed long ago by Aristotle, a model which has long depicted a homo-social romance between two males of eloquent rhetoric, one depicting the far left end of the scale and the other the far right of it.  Instead, as our Founding Fathers once addressed a majestic negative character within The Declaration of Independence, we should be utilizing the same tyrant king at one far end of a New World conflict. Meanwhile, at the other end of the spectrum left vacant we should be inserting his exact inverse, or perverse, with her being a condemned prostitute.

In contrasting these two, as the king would be blessed at one end of the spectrum, the prostitute would be cursed at the other; as he would be enthroned as the owner of all property, she would be abandoned as a homeless trespasser; as he would be the owner of all things, she would be owned by him; and so on.

If this faceless prostitute only had the benefit of legal rights going for her, then she would truly be lost forever.  Fortunately, our natural Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution aren't the same as legal or civil rights.

A natural right is greater than a legal right in how it reduces on the physical level to that of the heart of the collective Soul empowering the nameless and faceless.

Again, the difference between the prior tyranny of yesteryear and of government today, while the first was once a minority of a few scheming together for the purpose of maintaining their advantage over a disadvantaged majority, the second was a majority made up of many who, after gathering in fellowship for long consideration, decided upon preserving tyranny as a necessary-evil in order to advance the Civil Purpose of all men.

If chosen to serve as the leading member of a government, I would have two reasons to ever write something down.  While one would be to write conclusively as a figure of absolute power in order to create laws for the benefit of myself and my own posterity to the extent of the establishment of a legal dictatorship, the other reason to write something down would be to substantiate the inborn powers of my opposition in order to warn those who would be in opposition with them of a further oral declaration of what was written under the Light of the Truth - justification for divine intervention by the Almighty.

The second of the two leaders depicted above would be considered a convert over to the side of the disadvantaged.

In other words, as paradoxical as this might seem, true power isn't in the power itself, but in the threat of coming forth to demonstrate that power.

While the first example of written authority deals with the false powers of manipulation, with those things that we do, the second example of written authority deals with an open ended further warning of the Almighty's possible divine intervention into the matter, this last pertaining to the Truth.

Again, in a government instituted among men, if the people are to be included as part of the process of a more perfect Union, then they are going to need to be empowered in some fashion.  The way our Founding Fathers empowered the people within the U.S. Constitution was by writing down our Bill of Rights not with the original intentions of them being legal or civil rights, but as the natural will of the people as a collective Soul.

To elaborate, if I were to write something down as a legal conclusion either in the dirt or on a piece of paper, such a law would in very short time both blow and whither away becoming ineffective.  However, if I were to write something regarding the true empowerment of those who oppose me with the further intent of threatening to orally declare such under the Light of the Truth, it becomes a rock solid natural right upon the conscience of tyranny.

Ironically, while the makeup of the people will always be a relationship between both friends and foes, their true enemy will always be the evil of tyranny.  While divisions perpetuated among the people are false dichotomies tempting the involvement of higher authority into the matter, the threat of tyranny is the only justification for government involvement.

The reason for marriage isn't to exploit, but to share by lifting the veil off the bride to shine upon her a face of authority.  As it is with the bride, so are the people to be so empowered.  

Being much more than just legal documentation, the articles of the Bill of Rights within the U.S. Constitution are justification for the intervention of the Almighty Himself into the affairs of those making up the more perfect Union, with this being the relationship between the empowered people and the necessary tyranny they have established over themselves to advance their Civil Purpose - this being a warning made by our Founding Fathers towards every future tyranny, whether domestic or abroad, concerning the natural inborn powers inherited by this nations' posterity, rights of which need no legal protection.  This threat by our Founders still exists today against any who would be so foolish as to stumble up the people, the children of God, from advancing their Civil Purpose.

The true empowerment of the homeless prostitute, with her representing the disadvantaged majority, is in our Founders writing down of our Bill of Rights within The U.S. Constitution.