Who Says They Were 'Framers'?

[William Joyce]

Listening to the Alito hearings, it seems everyone's agreed that the WRITERS of the Constitution, men who were once called "The Founding Fathers," are now being called "the Framers."

I call for a cessation of use of this term.

Why?

It's liberally biased. To say "framers" is to suggest, as liberals would have it, that the Constitution is a mere "framework," to be filled in by liberal jurisprudence.

But it's not a "framework."

It's the LAW.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Listening to the Alito hearings, it seems everyone's agreed that the WRITERS of the Constitution, men who were once called "The Founding Fathers," are now being called "the Framers."

I call for a cessation of use of this term.

Why?

It's liberally biased. To say "framers" is to suggest, as liberals would have it, that the Constitution is a mere "framework," to be filled in by liberal jurisprudence.

But it's not a "framework."

It's the LAW.

Good point.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Listening to the Alito hearings, it seems everyone's agreed that the WRITERS of the Constitution, men who were once called "The Founding Fathers," are now being called "the Framers."

I call for a cessation of use of this term.

Why?

It's liberally biased. To say "framers" is to suggest, as liberals would have it, that the Constitution is a mere "framework," to be filled in by liberal jurisprudence.

But it's not a "framework."

It's the LAW.

No, it is a framework. The law is something the Congress passes.


Look in the Constitution. Where does it say that robbing a bank is illegal?






Like most righties, you are attempting to make an issue where none exist. We're sick of you policing our thoughts. Thanks to you guys, regardless of whether or not I say Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays, I think of politics and Bill O'Reilly. That's just great. Now you're telling me what words to use to refer to the Founding Fathers. Got any other thoughts you need to police today?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Good point.

No, its not a good point at all. Its a fairly lame point, or not a point at all. WHO CARES whether we call them framers or writers? How about we call them "authors" - writer implies that they all sat down on wrote on it, when in fact it was probably physically written down only by a few of them while the others discussed and dictated. Must make sure to use the word approved of by the right wing.

 

[Abbey Normal]

No, its not a good point at all. Its a fairly lame point, or not a point at all. WHO CARES whether we call them framers or writers? How about we call them "authors" - writer implies that they all sat down on wrote on it, when in fact it was probably physically written down only by a few of them while the others discussed and dictated. Must make sure to use the word approved of by the right wing.

You're right, Spidey. it's not a good point. It's a great point.
It's not surprising that you would be against anyone shining a light on lib-speak. There has been such overwhelming liberal bias in the media for so long, you just can't stand it when you are called on it.

 

[Hobbit]

Language can alter things. Calling people terrorists brings up feelings of hostility and anger. Calling them 'minutemen,' insurgents, or soldiers is using misleading terms to sanitize what they really are...murderers.

There's several other examples.

Fewer people would eat veal if it was called "baby cow."
If "getting an abortion" was referred to as a 'fetus killing' or even an 'intentional miscarriage,' they'd probably be less popular.
Many more examples include guano (bat dung, used in fertilizer), escargo (probably misspelled it, dang French, but it's edible snails), and, I think it' called glycogen, the ingredient in Jello that makes it hold its shape and is made from horse hooves.

 

[dilloduck]

Listening to the Alito hearings, it seems everyone's agreed that the WRITERS of the Constitution, men who were once called "The Founding Fathers," are now being called "the Framers."

I call for a cessation of use of this term.

Why?

It's liberally biased. To say "framers" is to suggest, as liberals would have it, that the Constitution is a mere "framework," to be filled in by liberal jurisprudence.

But it's not a "framework."

It's the LAW.

Wanna piggyback on that a bit and also complain about calling the vacant seat on the bench, Sanda O'Conners'. Many judges have sat there and I see no reason to find a clone of her to replace her other than to appease a few nut jobs. ( yes Teddy--you are included )

 

[William Joyce]

And I like how being anti-abortion makes you "anti-woman." Alito is surrounding himself with women to dodge the charge.

 

[Abbey Normal]

And I like how being anti-abortion makes you "anti-woman." Alito is surrounding himself with women to dodge the charge.

And along those lines, the word "abortion" itself is rarely used anymore. It's always "a woman's right to choose".

 

[William Joyce]

Yeah, that could almost be another thread, but you're right...

"Pro-choice," my butt... they're obviously not concerned about the woman who wants to let her baby live... just the woman who wants it drawn and quartered. But "choice" makes it sound so nice, like you're just "choosing" a flavor of ice cream. "Oh, I think I'll CHOOSE fudge stripe!"

 

[SpidermanTuba]

You're right, Spidey. it's not a good point. It's a great point.
It's not surprising that you would be against anyone shining a light on lib-speak. There has been such overwhelming liberal bias in the media for so long, you just can't stand it when you are called on it.

Lib-speak? You're the one telling people which words to use.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Fewer people would eat veal if it was called "baby cow."

At Gino's in town its called "Baby Veal". Its yummie.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Listening to the Alito hearings, it seems everyone's agreed that the WRITERS of the Constitution, men who were once called "The Founding Fathers," are now being called "the Framers."

I call for a cessation of use of this term.

Why?

It's liberally biased. To say "framers" is to suggest, as liberals would have it, that the Constitution is a mere "framework," to be filled in by liberal jurisprudence.

But it's not a "framework."

It's the LAW.

You have no evidence whatsoever that

A) they people are using the word "framer" more often than they were in the past

B) that liberals use the word "framer" and conservatives use the word "writer"

or

C) that use of the word "framer" causes anyone to think any differently about the Constitution.





You made it all up, to make a non-existant point.

Well done. You have created dispute where there was none before.

 

[manu1959]

You have no evidence whatsoever that

A) they people are using the word "framer" more often than they were in the past

B) that liberals use the word "framer" and conservatives use the word "writer"

or

C) that use of the word "framer" causes anyone to think any differently about the Constitution.

You made it all up, to make a non-existant point.

Well done. You have created dispute where there was none before.

couple of things.

if it is all made up it does not exist.....why are you arguing about it?

if there is no dispute whay are you disputing it

tell me .... did franklin and the rest write the constitution or did they frame it?

 

[musicman]

Yeah, that could almost be another thread, but you're right...

"Pro-choice," my butt... they're obviously not concerned about the woman who wants to let her baby live... just the woman who wants it drawn and quartered. But "choice" makes it sound so nice, like you're just "choosing" a flavor of ice cream. "Oh, I think I'll CHOOSE fudge stripe!"

LOL - "Make mine a collapsed skull in order to protect me from infanticide charges, please"!

 

[SpidermanTuba]

couple of things.

if it is all made up it does not exist.....why are you arguing about it?

if there is no dispute whay are you disputing it

tell me .... did franklin and the rest write the constitution or did they frame it?

The did both.


To frame- (from dictionary.com)

2 To conceive or design:

Are you claiming the Constitution was not conceived and designed by the people who wrote it? if they didn't, then who did????

 

[manu1959]

The did both.


To frame- (from dictionary.com)

2 To conceive or design:

Are you claiming the Constitution was not conceived and designed by the people who wrote it? if they didn't, then who did????

i am not making any claims.....and thank you for stating what you belive the term framer means in the context of writting the us constitution....i agree that they conceived it, designed it and wrote it....

 

[Abbey Normal]

i am not making any claims.....and thank you for stating what you belive the term framer means in the context of writting the us constitution....i agree that they conceived it, designed it and wrote it....

And aren't we lucky that they went beyond the framing (conception, design) stage and actually wrote it, so that we have the benefit of knowing exactly what they wanted it to say.

So we don't have to guess what the writers meant.

So we don't have to invent penumbras to in turn invent rights (like privacy) that aren't there.

So we can (ab)use the Constitution to back up a liberal agenda.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I have been against using the word "Framer" for a long time. Liberals prefer to use it instead of "Founder". Why? They have their underhanded reasons.

Words mean things. The difference between a Founder and a Framer is subtle, but telling.

A Founder implies a person who has constructed a firm, whole, solid, and complete Constitution. A Framer implies a person who has only constructed the basic outline of a Constitution….in other words, created a document that is to be "filled in" later. A Framer viewpoint implies that the Constitution is not solid and complete unto itself. In a very subtle manner they are demeaning our Constitution and its validity and imply that it is not a sufficient document to itself. Once this idea takes hold, the unraveling of our basic rights and form of government can begin. This attitude is also reflected in the usage of the liberal term "living constitution".

 

[theHawk]

It is a living document. It is subject to change as we see fit.


For example, wouldn't it would be nice to amend the constitution on the subject of abortion? Wouldn't need judges to "interpret" the constitution and apply it to abortion for us peons.