03-12-2018, 03:08 PM
(03-12-2018, 02:44 PM)Au165 Wrote: It doesn't matter how ridiculous it is (not really that ridiculous in a party based power grab actually), based on your explanation it creates a paradox that positions your argument of original intent against itself.
That's not what is being said. You have taken this into the weeds, but let's talk more about the moron thing. Explain the paradox above using the logic you have used in establishing original intent.
It's beyond ridiculous but anyway, they set up a framework, and being forward sighted people, they realized their framework would need to be altered from time to time, so they put in the amendment process. Now do you think they put in the amendment process with the idea that nobody would ever change anything? Of course not. So their intent was that it would be changed. So amendments are part of original intent. But they didn't make it an easy path, and I refer you back to your example.
So tell me, how can using what they intended, the way they intended, not be original intent?
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
