[tpaine]

I don't see that anyone here is advocating the -- "idea that there is an implicit constitutional authorization for the federal government to pursue "social justice".

Do you?

In fact, one of the biggest problems on this thread with the whole 'social contract' issue, - is the pejorative assumption being used [primarily by izzy], that the word 'social' somehow implies condoning socialism.

[Shalom Israel]

the pejorative assumption being used [primarily by izzy], that the word 'social' somehow implies condoning socialism.

I've stopped responding to tpaine directly, but for the record, Tactic, I'm of course making no such assumption. Rather, I'm discussing only the implications of the "contract" part of social contract.

As an aside, I've remarked before that the word "social" essentially negates whatever comes next: social security isn't secure; social justice isn't just; social contracts aren't contracts; etc.