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

To: Cboldt
"Constitutional" is defined by the victor, not by the law or the constitution.

If you believe that then you're ripe for the rule of man which is tyranny - what we have now.

No, "constitutional" is the rule of law of the Constitution itself AS WRITTEN and ORIGINALLY understood and intended which is essentially what we had for the first 125 years before the ungodly lurch to the Left in the 20th Century spiritually and politically.

112 posted on 06/23/2016 10:42:20 AM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]


To: Jim 0216
-- If you believe that then you're ripe for the rule of man which is tyranny - what we have now. --

I can work with either definition of "constitutional," and prefer to not argue over what the label means. My point is that the victor claims his actions are constitutional. As you point out, the "rule of man" that the PTB impose these days is labeled "constitutional" by the courts and the government. The official word (for what that is worth) is that homosexual marriage, affirmative action, deprivation of rights by entry on a secret list, unfettered snooping, etc. are "constitutional."

SCOTUS has Alice in Wonderland powers, and it is eager to use them.

I don't personally grant them legitimacy, but if push comes to shove, they'd kill me and laugh about it.

114 posted on 06/23/2016 10:50:47 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | 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