Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: robertpaulsen
The "original intent" of a hammer is to pound nails. Does that mean that it cannot be used to drive a wooden stake into the ground or remove a rusty muffler? C'mon.

Is this your way of saying you consider "original intent" irrelevant?

276 posted on 12/19/2004 11:03:46 AM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic
"Is this your way of saying you consider "original intent" irrelevant?"

It depends on how literal you mean to be.

If you believe the original intent of freedom of the press meant the freedom of newspapers, then the original intent is certainly irrelevant, isn't it? Or not?

I mean, it says "the press", not "the media" or "the fourth estate". So maybe you think the original intent of the Founding Fathers, newspapers, is the only medium to which the first amendment applies? You would.

The original intent is only relevant if it was meant to preclude any other interpretation. The phrase "shall not be infringed" is a good example.

But in this case, here we have Madison himself saying, "Yes, you may use the commerce clause that way, even though that's not what we originally intended."

Based on that, how can you conclude that the "original intent" is relevant? In this case, it's not.

279 posted on 12/19/2004 11:31:02 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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