Lets have a Poll...... Is our Constitution a taboo subject on T-Net?

[Treasure_Hunter]

I agree with Justice Scalia.......

Justice Scalia: Constitution is ‘dead’

"Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia took the stage at Southern Methodist University Monday night and argued the Constitution is “not a living document” and is “dead, dead, dead.”
Justice Scalia discussed how children would visit the Supreme Court and refer to the Constitution as a “living document” but that the Constitution is, in fact, “dead.” A staunch conservative and “textualist,” Scalia believes the law must be taken literally and that the original meaning of the Constitution is the best way to interpret it.
While giving a lecture with SMU law professor Bryan Garner, Justice Scalia also stated that his legal decisions do not always align with his political views. “The judge who always likes the results he reaches is a bad judge,” Scalia told the audience."

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[worldtalker]

Words themselves are expressions of thought. Everything written must be interpreted to gain the original essence behind the thought. That is why something written in one language can mean something different when translated. The written word is influenced heavily by the norms of society at the time. Technology, culture, arts, even region of states or countries. So to say that the constitution does not need to be interpreted is just silly. If you go back and try to read some of the literature and legal language of 1790 then you might have a tough time doing so. It is because you are unfamiliar with the words...you don't exactly what they meant at the time.

The founding fathers searched for and encased an idealism in the constitution. Looking at the constitution through reduction defeats the holistic meaning of it. Each part of the constitution does not stand on its own. The whole of the constitution is MORE then the sum of its parts. The Idealism behind the constitution is a ROCK. The original intentions of the founding fathers can never be altered.

This idealism cannot be interpreted. It is lost to us. We can read what was left behind but we will never know the TRUE meaning and intent of the founding fathers. Try as we might, none of us can truly understand what they went through at the time and what they meant. We can come up with a pretty good idea and then interpret and apply it.

Rebel and I are working on communicating with each other through mental wavelengths produced from the pineal gland. Once we achieve this, we will no longer need to interpret each other's words. Until then, all communication, words, gestures, etc... need interpretation.

Crispin

The third eye,the minds eye,sad,not many are open.

 

[sagittarius98]

3. Eat puppies...and I find out about it...rest in pieces.

You know Obama has eaten dogs before?

What In The World Did Obama Mean By His Joke A Pitbull is Delicious?

 

[sagittarius98]

The Constitution is a foundation. If you cut a piece of the foundation off, the house will wobble, and will eventually fall. If you take a piece of the Constitution away, you will find America is wobbly and will fall down.

 

[dieselram94]

Constitution is off limits! If it ain't broke don't fix it......

 

[0121stockpicker]

The Constitution is a foundation. If you cut a piece of the foundation off, the house will wobble, and will eventually fall. If you take a piece of the Constitution away, you will find America is wobbly and will fall down.

How do you take a piece of the constitution away?

 

[sagittarius98]

How do you take a piece of the constitution away?

Look at Obama, convince the public through propaganda, and now so many are swayed by him into thinking guns are bad.

 

[0121stockpicker]

Look at Obama, convince the public through propaganda, and now so many are swayed by him into thinking guns are bad.

What does that have to do with the constitution. Luckily the pres can't touch the constitution. Don't let folks scare you with inaccurate info.

 

[dieselram94]

Look at Obama, convince the public through propaganda, and now so many are swayed by him into thinking guns are bad.

With the amount of propaganda the leftists press is spewing and the lack of oversite over him Obama can do whatever he likes. Lets hope he is removed from office soon. The country cannot afford much more of him, not to mention how our standing in the world is steadily dropping.....Just saying.

 

[davest]

righto stock, and in order to amend or repeal any of it requires ratification by 3/4 of the states after the question of repeal or amending is allowed to be posted on the ballot. As far as executive orders President Obama has issued 144 of them. his predecessor issued 338. He is not going to write anything of any type to take away your guns or the 2nd amendment. Who is this leftist press you guys keep talking about? MSNBC? Rachel Maddow? Comedy Central? Seriously, can any of you name who owns the largest newspaper in the country? Or who owns the most radio stations in the same country?

 

[dieselram94]

Davest, newspapers are a dead issue (pun intended). What is your basis for saying he is not going to write anything to take our guns away? The leftist press is pretty much anything on tv. with the exception of Fox and The Blaze. I'm sorry what does owning the most radio stations have to do with this discussion?

 

[Rebel - KGC]

The third eye,the minds eye,sad,not many are open.

3rd Eye has NO emotion... does not "feel".

 

[davest]

Davest, newspapers are a dead issue (pun intended). What is your basis for saying he is not going to write anything to take our guns away? The leftist press is pretty much anything on tv. with the exception of Fox and The Blaze. I'm sorry what does owning the most radio stations have to do with this discussion?

I'm just trying to figure out what you mean by the leftist press if there is none. Again, and this is not an attack, you have nothing to back your remark up with. As far as President Obama trying to take your guns away, he cannot do that by executive fiat. btw, it is impossible to prove a negative but if you're willing to wager on him doing so, step up. Now, radio stations have a lot to do with what you hear, especially if you don't go for xm. Again, who owns the most radio stations in the country and what is their political bent? psst, their first name begins with a word that rhymes with "dear".

 

[0121stockpicker]

I'm just trying to figure out what you mean by the leftist press if there is none. Again, and this is not an attack, you have nothing to back your remark up with. As far as President Obama trying to take your guns away, he cannot do that by executive fiat. btw, it is impossible to prove a negative but if you're willing to wager on him doing so, step up. Now, radio stations have a lot to do with what you hear, especially if you don't go for xm. Again, who owns the most radio stations in the country and what is their political bent? psst, their first name begins with a word that rhymes with "dear".

Watch out, you'll start to upset some folks on these threads by either asking for or presenting facts. Truth not allowed if it differs with some people's world view. Best of luck.

 

[Crispin]

Watch out, you'll start to upset some folks on these threads by either asking for or presenting facts. Truth not allowed if it differs with some people's world view. Best of luck.

Stocky: Right or wrong, this statement does not belong in this thread. Respectfully, it belongs on my thread on bias. If you would like to post it there I would be happy to have a conversation on it.

On a more serious note: You are currently in the 2nd amendment Watchdog forum. I think the title of the forum is pretty clear. This forum is here to protect the second amendment, not debate it or discuss it. Theoretically, I could say, "In all fairness, we should have a '2nd amendment restriction forum' where we could talk about any issues concerning limited use of firearms in the US. However, I am not going to say this, because I do not believe this.

Best,
Crispin

 

[spartacus53]

psst, their first name begins with a word that rhymes with "dear".

Pap Smear

I don't ever see the amendment being changed, but with that said, there can be laws passed that may limit certain weapons and the amount of ammo they can hold. It's that simple

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Pap Smear

I don't ever see the amendment being changed, but with that said, there can be laws passed that may limit certain weapons and the amount of ammo they can hold. It's that simple

AGREE!

 

[dejapooh]

Every person in office has sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. So Help Me God. That is the United States. That's why we live here. That's why it was begun. Just because a percentage of people do not uphold their Sacred Oath, it is still the Law Of The Land. Period. Not suggesstions or rules to try to abide by, or temporary regulations. How about a Poll? Constitution of the United States: Do you believe in it? Yes/no/sometimes.
BB

Actually, the oath is, "So help me." Many people put God in there at their own volition, but it is not a requirement of the oath.

 

[dejapooh]

It appears a Supreme Court Judge agress with me.........


01/29/2013
Justice Scalia: Constitution is ‘dead’

"Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia took the stage at Southern Methodist University Monday night and argued the Constitution is “not a living document” and is “dead, dead, dead.”
Justice Scalia discussed how children would visit the Supreme Court and refer to the Constitution as a “living document” but that the Constitution is, in fact, “dead.” A staunch conservative and “textualist,” Scalia believes the law must be taken literally and that the original meaning of the Constitution is the best way to interpret it.
While giving a lecture with SMU law professor Bryan Garner, Justice Scalia also stated that his legal decisions do not always align with his political views. “The judge who always likes the results he reaches is a bad judge,” Scalia told the audience."

Quoting Scalia as the final word on the Constitution is like pointing to Marx and the final word on Democratic Socialism. If you point to the most radical extreme and use that as the example or definition, you are not adding much to your argument.

 

[sagittarius98]

However, I am not going to say this, because I do not believe this.

Your previous posts just pointed to limiting the 2nd. A bit off topic, but in the banned thread, you commented on my phrase "Crispin and other liberals." Your name was just the easiest to put and the first one to come to mind as a liberal in this discussion. I dislike using abbreviated names, as someday, someone will take offense, but your name is short, and easy to use.