[irish_links]

"...Surely, then, you'll tell me what tradition Presser, Miller, Plessy v. Ferguson and the Dred Scott case fall under? The evil and tyrannical school of jurisprudence?..."

These cases were resolved through the tradition of courts considering and interpreting the Constitution, its Bill of Rights and Amendments, Common Law precedent and statute as they pertain to the facts of the case. Making up the law on the fly, thereby depriving the rights of the people to govern themselves had nothing to do with them.

As for slavery (in re Dred Scott), it was ended by the ratification of the 13th Amendment by the several states. The Emancipation Proclimation was only tangential and the Supreme Court never dictated it. Slavery was ended by the democratic action of the people.

You seem determined to deprive the people of their right of self governance. You claim that this is in the "spirit" of the Constitution. How on earth have you arrived at that conclusion?

[Skywalk]

ROFL

Now you claim that it is a matter of self-governance?

Fortunately, blacks were not being exterminated instead of enslaved because if you had your way, such would be a matter of "self-governance."

Sorry, there are certain things that are not up for any government or "majority" to decide, but I thought we all agreed with that here on FR.

I guess not. As long as you got the votes, it's cool.

No revolution, just pressure King George, that'll work. Don't demand that the OBVIOUS be acknowledged(slaves are sovereign beings and not property) but instead let's all vote on it and hope it turns out for the best.

Hey, you go ahead with that view, seems like you can justify anything with that. I'm supposed to not only go along with that view, but not even disagree unless it's done through the courts and "traditional forms of self-governance."

Fantastic.