“Unless you are very very good with Ouija board, original intent can no longer be determined. “ - DM
“Spoken like a true liberal/socialist/totalitarian.” - Triple
Your reply:
“Rather, written by one who recognizes that the only artifacts we have use language, and we have to look at the meaning of the language used, in the context of the times in which the language was written, as such meaning can be determined.” - DM
You have me there...hmmmm wait a minute. Oh, on second thought, your reply contains some fancy words, but makes absolutely no sense - further it does not support your previous assertion that original intent can not be determined.
Are you ok, DM?
It may be a fine point, but I distinguish between intent and meaning, as do some other conservatives. Going after intent suggests that the words used may have a meaning that may have been an imperfect representation of the mental state of the writer(s), and that mental state should be the true guide to the law. By contrast, original meaning cuts off the search for the mental state different from the meaning of the words.
Original meaning implies that the constitution is more like a contract, and what ever the original parties wanted, what we got is the constitution, and that guides and restricts future judges.
Hope that helps.