[HW Help]Ratifying the constitution w/out the bill of rights

Tomorrow I have to debate on the federalists side of ratifying the constitution and why the bill of rights is not needed.I have experience in debating but I just have a hard time debating against the bill of rights. If anyone can give me some reasons why the bill of rights wasn't needed and a reasoning of why the Constitution was written in secrecy then that would be very very helpfull. I've tried google but theres no real good debate against having the bill of rights.

 

I typed up a ton of crap, realizing it was FOR the bill of rights. To be honest, there isn't. It protects the freedom of all of us.
But if you think more into it, Washington DID side with Hamilton, who believed in a stronger central government. Although that's after the Constitution/bill of rights. I would argue about how you can't trust everybody to do the right thing, whether they are just citizens or people in state governments, a strong central government will help keep everything more together. IDK, I'm just talking out of my ass pretty much, but hopefully there is SOME helpful info in here.