Yurt
Gold Member
i think some people forget that we live in a common law nation, NOT a code state. The constitution is subject to interpretation. That interpretation is subject to change....
hence plessy v ferguson ends up being reversed by brown v bd of ed.
and there are always questions about how one is to APPLY a particular clause.
people need to understand that scholars have disagreed for 200 years and they aren't going to suddenly pretend that they have THE answer.
it;s silly.
good points, and i agree, people will continue disagreeing, at least in this country that is allowed
thank you. but what would you say to people who think there is only one answer.... one way to respond constitutionally? don't the pretend constitutionalists offend your sensibilities given you've studied... i've studied... i'd hate to think either of us would pretend to know all... though of course we have opinions on different subjects. but some of these people, who've never studied .... ever... get offended when one suggests that perhaps they should study before they offer such definitive views.
i don't think one needs to be a scholar or studied up as much as a lawyer to understand the constitution. while studying and being a scholar allows you to more fully understand the debates and cases etc....IMO, our political and life leanings influence how we look at laws and the constitution. two equally reknowned scholars could wholly disagree, so i do not think there is "one" way to look at it, however, our judicial system recognizes scotus precedent as essentially being the "one" right way of interpreting the constitution.
as to offense, i don't know, was it said condescending, like your opinion doesn't count as much as mine because i studied more....sometimes wisdom comes from the mouth of babes