Subject:
|
"The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Oct 2001 08:15:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
263 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Simpson writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In: http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=13712
> >
> > Scott Arthur derides the US constitution with these words:
> >
> > > It means that we have a legal framework which reflects the way
> > > we live today. We are not held ransom by a bunch of politically
> > > appointed lawyers arguing over semantics based on a centuries
> > > old piece of paper.
> >
> > Well that "centuries old piece of paper" (parchment, actually) has kept us
> > free, despite his scorn for it.
> >
> > Freer than he is, in fact, although he'll never admit it.
> >
> > He prefers to be ruled by fiats and regulations often developed and imposed,
> > without specific debate, by ministers who serve a government elected by a
> > bare majority (or less if it is a coalition) and protected by empty
> > assurances of rights rather than by principles that take a lot MORE than a
> > bare majority to overturn, because they are Constitutional Amendments.
> >
> > Here's an op ed piece I found rather touching.
> >
> > http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20011011.html
> >
> > Read it.
> >
> > ... and think about what it says before you (collective you, I mean any of
> > you, not just Scott) slur those who are true to its principles even if they
> > oppose the whim of the moment, or slur those who would take up arms to
> > defend it, here OR abroad, or slur those who think we do live in the best
> > and most free country in the world and are proud enough to say so.
> >
> > I know who my friends are. And who they are not.
>
> Larry:
>
> I'm glad that you spoke to Scott's comments. As soon as I read them yesterday,
> I tried to draft a reply that wasn't full of anger, but realized that I couldn't
> at the time, so I dropped it.
>
> I suppose that the jist of my reply to his comments is that his liberty as a
> free Scot and our liberty as free Americans is not resting on a foundation that
> any of us ourselves have fully laid. Without the historical and systematic
> obedience and respect for the continuity of recognized precedent in matters of
> law, civics, and government, the legal framework that Scott regards as superior
> would not in fact exist; Scott, and myself, and all of us can in fact live today
> with confidence in our legal systems' respect for our individual liberties
> because the corpus of precedents, legislations and decisions that shape the
> protection of our fundamental liberties have not been subject to the whim of how
> "we live today," but are instead shaped and tempered by the great continuity of
> jurisprudence that in turn rests upon (and is tempered itself) by the explicit
> statement of principled government --in my case, the Constitution --by which all
> judgmenents owe obedience.
>
> The United States Constitution has proven its merit, and is still strong and
> alive after 200 years. The burden is upon any man who would scoff at it's
> authority. I find it ironic that Scott would dismiss this revered document so
> easily, because it's genesis is in part found within the Magna Carta, and its
> words are intertwined with the blood and history of the British.
I have made this point before:
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=11507
>
> I don't think the rest of the world understands our devotion to this document.
Then perhaps you do not understand that the document is holding you hostage
to reason and change. The gun debate is a good example of that.
The fact remains that (as I understand it) GWB can erode your rights with
only 25% of the vote. To erode my rights, TB would have to refer to Europe.
It is not 100% relevant, but I did enjoy this:
http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/letter_from_america/newsid_72000/72371.stm
I wish I had time to listen to or read all Cookes letters. (If you live in
the UK: 8.45 r4 Sundays)
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
43 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
