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

To: VRWCmember

"One might construe it means there is a right to abortion, gay marriage, incest, unfettered drug use, or any number of other individual "personal rights" that 5 justices can agree to liberally construct, if PH's words are to be taken literally and liberally in this case"

It "means" that such things are left to the states or the people to decide. It's not Federal, in other words.


9 posted on 07/06/2005 12:08:32 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry (Esse Quam Videre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: RegulatorCountry
It "means" that such things are left to the states or the people to decide. It's not Federal, in other words.

Bingo! Give that man a ceegar.

Stating the same intent, but not the same words, on another thread.

10 posted on 07/06/2005 12:15:44 PM PDT by Just another Joe (Monthly donors make better lovers. Ask my wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: RegulatorCountry
It "means" that such things are left to the states or the people to decide.

I agree, but when one applies "liberal constructionism" and then uses the 14th amendment to say the states can't deny these "liberally constructed" individual rights, you get rulings like Roe v Wade, and many other atrocities. All of a sudden, things that were rightly left to the states or the people to decide become constitutional rights (via liberal construction). Once you get 5 justices to construct a "right" out of thin air, the people and the states no longer have any say in deciding the matter.

11 posted on 07/06/2005 12:16:20 PM PDT by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | 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