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

To: Jim 0216

Your continued underlining and ignoring all the direct text in between is as moronic as the finding of the right to an abortion within the constitution. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime... How about we take ‘No person shall be held to answer...without just compensation.’? Salaries for prisoners, retirement plans as well...

Sorry, the argument does not fly with a clear reading. No person shall be is directly tied to being held for charges.


209 posted on 11/24/2007 12:03:05 PM PST by kingu (No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies ]


To: kingu
...ignoring all the direct text in between is as moronic...the argument does not fly with a clear reading.

Your personal attacks are not appreciated, immature and distract form whatever validity is in your argument. However, I'll attempt to continue with you.

I've cited the entire 5th Amendment. What part of it is being "ignored" or "unclear" to you? Its a compound sentence. To be a little more precise, the phrase "nor shall any person be.." ties to succeeding series of phrases including "...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

What do you want it to say? Again, you seem to be arguing with the very wording of the Constitution, and like the liberal judges, seem to want it to mean what suits you, whatever that is.

210 posted on 11/24/2007 1:11:01 PM PST by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | 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