Skip to main content

View Diary: On Constitutional Interpretation: Originalism v. A Living Constitution? (286 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well (none)
    one decent issue when it comes to "original understanding" is the question of whose understanding is determinative.  Is it the understanding of the framers who wrote the words, or is it the understanding of the people who voted to ratify the document?

    The latter is the more logical view, but it's also pretty unknowable, so it doesn't get you very far.  But I do think there's a point to saying that the personal religious views of the framers really shouldn't control the meaning of the First Amendment, one way or the other.

    •  Precisely (none)
      That's why it's ridiculous to say that the Constitution was crafted in any particular religious tradition, or use the personal views of anybody in interpretation. The point of fact is just to demonstrate the glaring hypocrisy of the theocrats.

      Yes to Roe, no to Rove

      by cubicalization on Sat Jul 23, 2005 at 12:55:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There is debate (none)
        iirc when some founders were still alive, on the floor of COngress, or so I have read, as to whether allowing the Postal Service not to deliver on Sunday qualified as establishment.  The Post Office kept up iirc seven day delivery.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (160)
  • Community (74)
  • Elections (45)
  • Bernie Sanders (43)
  • Environment (43)
  • 2016 (41)
  • Hillary Clinton (36)
  • Spam (35)
  • Culture (35)
  • Republicans (34)
  • Climate Change (32)
  • Media (32)
  • Civil Rights (28)
  • Labor (27)
  • Congress (26)
  • Law (25)
  • Science (24)
  • Education (24)
  • Texas (23)
  • Barack Obama (22)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site