Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: x
No. The amendment wasn't meaningless and did provide some protection of citizens' basic rights against infringement by state governments.

I think the 14th amendment was not ratified by a legitimate process and that it was not very well worded for what it attempted to do.

I dislike many ways in which the court has used it's "incorporation doctrine" to bully states into doing things the court wanted to impose on them, but the idea that freedom of speech and the right to keep and bear arms should be "optional" is something I very much don't want to accept.

So this "incorporation doctrine" thing has done some good things. The question is whether the good it has done is worth the harm it has done.

We got Abortion on Demand from it. We got Anchor Babies out of it. We banned prayer in public schools because of it. We rewrote the qualifications for president to allow anchor babies. We got "Wickard" out of it. We got "Gay" marriage out of it.

We got a host of nefarious and destructive ideas imposed on us out of the incorporation doctrine.

What a mess.

41 posted on 09/30/2024 1:59:08 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp
Not following Wickard relating to Incorporation of the Bill of Rights. Wickard was pure Commerce Clause and the Judiciary’s deference to the Legislative branch regarding such matters.
69 posted on 10/01/2024 1:23:59 AM PDT by Fury (I )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson