ihopehefails
VIP Member
- Oct 3, 2009
- 3,384
- 228
- 83
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #101
That is correct. The Constitution really isn't that subjective in its interpretation. The meanings of the document are given over to what the signers of the document understood it to mean. That is to say, if the Founders believed that the Second Amendment said a thing a certain way, that is the way we must treat it.nah. the original meaning of the constitution is subjective. whether the original meaning is the perfect meaning is a highly debated opinion. fail.
OK but then who is it subjective to? It must have had a subjective meaning to the people who signed it and the meaning that they thought it had was the reason they signed it because if it had a different meaning then they would not have signed it. That signature placed it into law and at that moment thus setting that meaning in stone forever until someone alters or abolishes the constitution.
Yes. Its an agreement between two people or entities and an honest deal always holds up both ends of the bargain as both entities believed it meant. The text is just for the legal procedures when there is a disagreement. The agreement on paper just reflects what is in both entities had in mind and therefore the actually meaning exist in their agreed upon intentions that both sides had.