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

To: FlingWingFlyer
Just because "we the people" want something does not mean it's legal. The constitution must be followed.

What if 'we the people' decide that free speech should be banned? Or the right to petition? Or, in this case, want to scrub the equal protection provision?

"We the people" are ignorant of the constitution. Just look at the last election.

17 posted on 02/03/2009 11:34:57 PM PST by ex91B10 (So many opinions, so little time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: ex91B10

Sorry pal. I guess I goofed up when I thought this was an AMENDMENT to the Constitution! That’s what “we the people” do. We do it by engaging in the democratic process at the polls. There was a time in this dump when the majority ruled. If the majority decides we shouldn’t have freedom of speech, then so be it.


19 posted on 02/03/2009 11:39:24 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (I wish it was 20 January 2013. I've had enough of this crap already.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: ex91B10

We the people meant the writers of the Constitution during the convention of 1787, not the general public, not the citizens at large. Moreover, the preamble has no legal force; it is not law.

The real question in this issue is who determines the path for the morals of a society. The society in the most liberal state in the union has twice claimed that no rights are to be taken from homosexuals; they just can’t use the term “marriage” to describe their relationships.

Since when is a word a “right?”

Looks like I’m going to write a few letters to the newspapers today.


31 posted on 02/04/2009 4:06:33 AM PST by Loud Mime (influencecongress dot com - download the newsletter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | 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