Why can discussion on civil liberties in the Constituent Assembly not be called mere idealism?

Because it changed into Fundamental Rights and judicial protection

Direct answer: A is correct. Civil liberties are freedoms that protect people from unjust interference and allow them to live and participate with dignity. In the Constituent Assembly, concern for these freedoms was not left as a hopeful speech or abstract idea. It was given a legal and constitutional form through Fundamental Rights, and protection was supported by the possibility of approaching courts when rights were violated. A is correct because it shows the movement from an ideal to enforceable provisions and remedies. B is wrong because civil liberties did enter the Constitution. C is wrong because the discussion produced concrete constitutional rules. D is wrong because the purpose was to protect rights, not deny them. Memory cue: an ideal becomes practical when it receives a constitutional guarantee and a remedy.

This is a Class 9 Civics question. Chapter: Constitutional Design. Topic: Making of the Indian Constitution (Constituent Assembly).