Yes, that is the agreed upon definition of parsing someones words. You take direct quotes out of context in order to misrepresent what they said. Honestly, do you own a dictionary?
As you keep having trouble with the meaning of commonly accepted English words and terminology, yet are fast to grab hold of semantics to bolster your point, I'm going to guess that you are currently in higher education or a recent graduate. There is nothing like a little bit of knowledge to bring a fool to full bloom.
Getting back to the subject, when a 90 pound woman places a condition of entry on a 300 pound repair man, that he not be armed when he enters her house (because she is still a bit traumatized by being raped and wants to maintain her advantage on her property at all times by being the only one with a gun), what would you propose that the all powerful state do to punish her great offense? Prison, fine, both? Lord knows, next she will be putting up "No Swimming" signs.
I'm very curious what punishment you will hand out for those who treat their property as if it were theirs to do with as they please. You certainly don't want to live in a state where people can just abridge YOUR rights at their home, right?
FYI, the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not individuals. Any law to the contrary is wrong. If I only want green eyed people that worship toads to visit my house, it has nothing to do with the Constitution. Ending Jim Crow in government was a fantastic move forward. Applying anti-discrimination laws to individual businesses was a misguided move. What a man wants to do at his lunch counter is his business, per natural law.
I am a recent graduate; in fact your life may one day literally be in my hands as I am desirous to get a job working with the programming language Ada --which is commonly used in mission-/safety-critical software, like air traffic control, medical devices, nuclear reactors, military weapons-- so it's a DAMN GOOD THING that I am "fast to grab hold of semantics."
In such a job it is IMPERATIVE that one consider the exceptional-circumstances. (i.e. things like your conditionals being illegal/invalid.)
I'm very curious what punishment you will hand out for those who treat their property as if it were theirs to do with as they please.
None; I never claimed that it wasn't. What I did claim was that some of your conditions might be immoral or illegal.
You certainly don't want to live in a state where people can just abridge YOUR rights at their home, right?
Where did I *EVER* say that you had no right to use force to remove me from your property [in the case of trespass]? Even lethally.
I have no problem with that.
FYI, the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not individuals.
True; however there are "grey areas" where something might be applicable: consider private security guards / police organizations... I sure as hell don't want them exempt from 4th Amendment restrictions simply because they aren't "government entities." {If they were there is little doubt in my mind that the government could employ such a "private force" in order to circumvent Constitutional restrictions; before you say that doing so would be illegitimate (and I agree there) consider the case of tax-laws: the supreme court has ruled that the prohibition on retroactive [that is, ex post facto] laws applies only to criminal law, yet the Congress may retroactively change tax-laws by deeming them "regulatory" yet they [government] pursues such tax-law violators in criminal court.}