Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigsig
Perhaps I was being too subtle and that’s what caused you to miss the point. Jefferson, revered and quoted earlier as the person who helped define these great concepts of freedom and privacy in our Constitution, lived in a time when it was perfectly acceptable for him to own slaves. (It’s not character assignation if it’s true).
|
It is a character attack if it is used to attack the points being made by attacking the person. Truth of the charge has nothing to do with it. We are supposed to accept, by your charge, that since Jefferson owned slaves and that since slavery is viewed as abhorent and is now unconstitutional that his thoughts on liberty have no merit? What complete drivel. And why is it when I disagree it is assumed that I "missed the point". I got the point. I disagreed with the point.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigsig
The point is times change, and the interpretation of the Constitution changes based on societies values at the time.
|
In the case of slavery, the interpretation of the constitution was not changed. It was amended. Would that people today would have the courage and integrity to actually attempt to amend the constitution if they think parts of it are outdated. Instead, they use the courts to change it by judicial fiat. It is a violation (not an interpretation), of the constitution, IMO, for the "commerce clause" to be used as the open door for damn near anything the Congress wants to do.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigsig
You have the right of privacy, but it doesn’t supersede the publics’ right to security or the protection of a child
|
Yes, it does (or it should). This "for the children" as the excuse to dispose of individual liberty is the argument of scalawags and power mongers (or perhaps merely the timid). My right to privacy can (or should) only be invaded with just cause and proper warrants. The ridiculing of the "right to privacy" by some conservatives as not being in the constitution is something I strongly disagree with. For sure, the words are not there, but it is impossible for many of the other rights to exist without it.