Why do you argue with these dolts about eminent domain? Of course it's in the Consitution. Of course it was in there from the beginning. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments expressly reference it. And it's in every state constitution as well.
But they don't like it. That's all that matters. They are smorgasboard constitutionalists. They pick only what they like.
They are smorgasboard constitutionalists. They pick only what they like.This from a supporter of the "living, breathing document" school of thought, that says you can change the Constitution says by redefining the words.
Why do you argue with these dolts about eminent domain? Of course it's in the Consitution. Of course it was in there from the beginning. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments expressly reference it. And it's in every state constitution as well. But they don't like it. That's all that matters. They are smorgasboard constitutionalists. They pick only what they like.Kevin, you and I agree on almost nothing. But the absurdity I have seen in this "You are here"'s argument is beyond folly, and has brought us -- *US* -- together on the same page.
Yah's argument that Eminent Domain is inherently evil, is absurd on its face. Obviously it is morally neutral, and obviously the founding fathers thought so too.