Members banned from this thread: Humorme


Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 134
Thanks Tree54Thanks

Thread: Constitutional originalism

  1. #51
    Veteran Member Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    43,350
    Thanks
    8240

    Well they didn't like a standing army they had to pay taxes for if you want to get technical.

  2. #52
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,451
    Thanks
    254

    From
    under a rock near NC / GA
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    Are you saying the opinion I just posted regarding the Declaration of Independence and inalienable rights is not that relevant?
    It's an opinion and has no relevance in law. If you think a person has an inalienable right to live, that is your opinion. In law, a person has an unalienable Right to live.

  3. #53
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,451
    Thanks
    254

    From
    under a rock near NC / GA
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Legal source of distinction?

    It's been posted at least twice. Links posted. Read the thread so that you will be informed as to what this conversation is about.

  4. #54
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    41,409
    Thanks
    19275

    From
    Depends on what year....
    Quote Originally Posted by Humorme View Post
    It's been posted at least twice. Links posted. Read the thread so that you will be informed as to what this conversation is about.
    All I saw was that you cited the Preamble and the 14th Amendment. That does not answer the inquiry, which requires a federal statute or a Supreme Court case. If there is a difference between what is in the Preamble and what is in the 14th Amendment, the latter controls.

  5. #55
    New Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    959
    Thanks
    233

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    I have heard it argued that the intent of the FFs was to make sure they had the makings of a militia if needed as they feared a standing army, thus the prevention of the populous being unable to have weapons.

    Since the world has morphed and there is a standing army, a militia isn't needed thus the intent is no longer valid.

    As opposed to my righty acquaintance who says the intent of the first amendment was only to protect white protestants and the protestant christian religion. And he will quote tons of letters from FFs and such to justify his claim that that was the intent so that's how it should be. Just as one example.
    You are correct as to the fear of a standing army but that's hardly the exclusive reason to guarantee the right to own and carry guns. You ignore arms for self defense and most importantly as a safeguard against the potential for any government to morph into tyranny.

  6. #56
    Veteran Member cpicturetaker12's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    15,465
    Thanks
    12198

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    One member of our morning coffee klatch is a fairly hard line right winger, and very much an originalist. He appears to be quite the scholar and has the most annoying tendency to tell us exactly what the FFs meant in various parts of the constitution. And that is cast in stone.

    But then, when discussing the 2nd amendment, he instantly becomes a literalist.

    And I've seen this schizophrenia in several righties.

    Discuss.
    Except there are 2 components of the 2nd--the 2 components are axiomatic. Gun nuts and wingers ALWAYS LEAVE OFF THE OTHER PART!! Hell, maybe they don't even know there is another part. And I always point out, that's not not a period between the 2, its a COMMA.

    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
    Last edited by cpicturetaker12; 26th February 2017 at 07:15 AM.

  7. #57
    Banned Camp Yeti 8 Jungle Swing Champion, YetiSports 4 - Albatross Overload Champion, YetiSports7 - Snowboard FreeRide Champion, Alu`s Revenge Champion
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    78,846
    Thanks
    52225

    From
    out of nowhere!
    Quote Originally Posted by libertariat720 View Post
    Read the federalist papers. It's all spelled out in there.

    Avalon Project - The Federalist Papers
    Wait. If we're to take the Constitution as its written, why do we need the Federalist Papers to tell us what it means?
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey and RNG

  8. #58
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    41,409
    Thanks
    19275

    From
    Depends on what year....
    Quote Originally Posted by boontito View Post
    Wait. If we're to take the Constitution as its written, why do we need the Federalist Papers to tell us what it means?
    Correct. A strict textualist would not refer to outside sources (except, of course, judicial precedent).

  9. #59
    Member
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,994
    Thanks
    872

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by boontito View Post
    Wait. If we're to take the Constitution as its written, why do we need the Federalist Papers to tell us what it means?
    In that circumstance they're saying, "When we wrote the Constitution we meant ____" Statements made to induce delegates to actually ratify.....

  10. #60
    Franken-Stein 2020 excalibur's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    6,298
    Thanks
    2337

    From
    The Milky Way
    Quote Originally Posted by cpicturetaker12 View Post
    Except there are 2 components of the 2nd--the 2 components are axiomatic. Gun nuts and wingers ALWAYS LEAVE OFF THE OTHER PART!! Hell, maybe they don't even know there is another part. And I always point out, that's not not a period between the 2, its a COMMA.

    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.


    The operative part is "the right of the people". See, that was easy, wasn't it.

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. It's A Constitutional Obligation
    By Howey in forum Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 17th February 2016, 02:29 PM
  2. Constitutional right...
    By The Man in forum Current Events
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 18th August 2012, 09:29 AM
  3. War in Iraq Constitutional?
    By Conservative15 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 12th October 2008, 04:07 PM
  4. Constitutional?
    By Conservative15 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 27th September 2008, 06:58 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed