Exaggeration does not help their case

Posted on by

When I read something like this I am inclined to dismiss everything they say because of the exaggeration (emphasis added):

In overruling Roe v. Wade, and with it nearly 50 years of American law, and expanding the reach of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, which is a jurisprudential innovation of more recent vintage, the Supreme Court wants the public to accept that history rules the present — and that our founding charter, which is hailed as a beacon of liberty pointing to a more perfect union, reflects rules set in stone that no judge should dare disturb.

This is just one example from the article.

I almost want to scream at them:

Judges must interpret the law as written! They don’t get to change it.

If the constitution needs to be changed to allow a new law, or strike down an existing one, then there is a process to change the constitution. USE IT! Do not expect judges to be some sort of super legislators.

Share

7 thoughts on “Exaggeration does not help their case”

  1. Yes, exactly! But theirs is an aberrant and minority opinion and they know it, so using a constitutional work-around of some sort is their only chance of gaining their goals.

    • IMO they never tried to implement an amendment and make it lawful properly because they knew the support wouldn’t be there, and they didn’t want that to become apparent to everyone else. They had all that time to do so after all. What they’re left with is a few super-blue states that will allow abortion, but even some of those may be in jeopardy as well.

      • I was mostly talking about the gun rights side of things. But it does apply to the abortion issue.

  2. I don’t cipher real well. But I done red me that there constitution. And I don’t see the word abortion anywhere? So, a bunch of blackrobes we hired to read that paper for us. And they said they don’t see that word either.
    So it ain’t something the federale government has anything to say about. You know. Like it says in that there10th. amendment thing.
    Them same over-paid readers said that we can carry our firearms around with us now. (kind of like we have been anyway. But don’t tell nobody, OK.) And they told government it ain’t none of their business.
    Cause unlike that abortion word. Arms beared and kept by we the peoples is in that there paper that to run our country by.
    It seems kind of simple. Words there, or not there.
    But if making shit-up out of thin air just so you can murder innocent babies, is the way you want to run things. Have at it. Just don’t expect it to last long when you do.
    Granny told me about this thing called the golden rule. And about doing to others the way you want to be treated.
    So you’all been ripping the un-born apart like an over-cooked chicken at dinnertime. Then using their body parts to study?
    Ya’all be f–ked in the head. On top of not ciphering so well you own self.

  3. It is amazing, though maybe it should not be, the number of people who are unaware of Article V of the US Constitution, the section on making amendments, and the the whole point of the constitution is to establish the principles and framework for a government, and that it DOES stand above the ordinary laws and codes passed in regular way by congress. They don’t really get the fundamental idea of “checks and balances between co-equal branches of government.”

    Saddening, and frustrating, but it should not be surprising to me any more. But it is.

  4. Over the last two years we’ve learned from our betters just who “Our bodies, Ourselves” apply to.

Comments are closed.