------------------
To: inquest
You and Judge Black have claimed that the framers of the 14th intended to say a certain thing. I'm not arguing that point.
Of course you are; -- the framers intended to restrict states from violating constitutional rights. They wrote exactly that.
What you both have failed to explain is why it is that what somebody claims he intended to write is to be considered more valid than what he actually writes.
Nope, -- we haven't failed to explain, YOU have failed to understand the actual written language of the 14th. WE can't help you, it appears. - And I no longer WANT to.
You also failed to counter the point I made about the text of the amendment, in showing in detail that it doesn't mention the Bill of Rights, or even allude to them. All you said in response to that, is (again) that the framers intended to have it refer to the Bill of Rights. Thus, you're taking the conversation around in circles, and I think anyone watching us can see that.
Whatever. -- I, nor anyone else, is obligated to 'counter, in detail' your imaginings. Indeed, it appears to be impossible, due to your inability to frame logical points.
Whether or not you terminate the conversation is your choice, but that's not going to stop me from pointing out your non sequiturs to everyone else.
Have at it. - You'll simply make a bigger spectacle of your irrationality.
38 posted on 5/23/02 2:28 PM Pacific by tpaine
-----------------------------------
You did not respond to the above.
--- Then, a few days later, you again made a comment to the effect that the true 'intent' of the 14th was to subjugate the states to federal power. - I countered, - and thus, -- we again find ourselves at this impass.
You insist that the constitution is flawed. I insist it is not.
Our political system is flawed.
I didn't respond to it because you made it clear you didn't want to go any further. From that very post: "WE can't help you, it appears. - And I no longer WANT to." Plus, if we did go further, we would have just been going around in the same circles we'd been going around in, and Ned had much more interesting things to talk about.
Then, a few days later, you again made a comment to the effect that the true 'intent' of the 14th was to subjugate the states to federal power.
I never said that, or anything to that effect. I certainly did say that the feds are presently using the 14th for that purpose, because they clearly are; but I never said that that was the intent of the framers. To help clear up my position on that, you might refer to my #8: "My biggest problem isn't with the actual provisions of the amendment, but with the way it gets glaringly misapplied."