To: JZelle
Scalia is right. The "living Constitution" crowd reminds me of the "Spirit of Vatican II" crowd. What is in writing does not support their aims, so they talk endlessly about the "spirit" of the words.
4 posted on
02/27/2006 12:20:26 PM PST by
RobbyS
( CHIRHO)
To: RobbyS
" . . . so they talk endlessly about the "spirit" of the words."
Except regarding the 2nd Amendment, where they reject not only the spirit, but also the letter of the law.
To: RobbyS
"The "living Constitution" crowd reminds me of the "Spirit of Vatican II" crowd."For the most part, they are the same people.
30 posted on
02/27/2006 12:59:21 PM PST by
Designer
(Just a nit-pick'n and chagrin'n)
To: RobbyS
What is in writing does not support their aims, so they talk endlessly about the "spirit" of the words. Or when they come up with the whack-job theory that because something's not in the Constitution, the Constitution can prohibit it.
Allrightythen!
(LOL)
77 posted on
02/28/2006 6:51:18 AM PST by
MamaTexan
(I am NOT a ~legal entity~, nor am I a *person* as created by law!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson