“You are fond of citing numbers as proof of something though.”
Yes indeed, I plead guilty. However on this thread it was YOU who first brought up the numbers of Justices on each side of this decision.
Scalia jumped the shark. And these fools dared to suggest that Thomas didn’t have the intellectual gravitas to sit on the Supreme Court. Thomas’ dissent is a brilliant piece of legal analysis and original intent Constitutional interpretation.
Yes indeed, I plead guilty.
You are obviously playing to the cheap seats who don't know any better than to think "numbers of people who believe something" = "true." Again, it is a lawyer's tactic, and not that of a objective, rational person.
However on this thread it was YOU who first brought up the numbers of Justices on each side of this decision.
I most certainly did, but not in an attempt to prove them right, more to illustrate that they cannot even agree amongst themselves. It demonstrates a conclusion with no possible counterargument; That at least two people are WRONG.
By the way, good work on debunking Joel Gilbert. Sometimes it just takes someone who is willing to do the legwork.