Replies

If the Consitution can be re-interpreted with subjective penumbras and new phantom rights to privacy non-discrimination based on sex (i.e. based on ideology), then we become a nation of men, not laws, and the Republic is history. Unless the Constitution is interpreted AS THE FRAMERS INTENDED, it becomes subject to the ideological whims of immoral and amoral leaders (a form of tyranny), which will spell the doom of this republic. The founders clearly and repeatedly warned that our republic is contingent upon the virtue and morality of its people and leaders. They understood the debased nature, not only in rulers, but also in the people. And guess what, the basic nature of people has not changed - it is still debased. Cultural norms change but basic moral principles do not ever change. That is the difference between the founders and the liberal activists on the courts and in the ACLU - The former believed in absolute moral principles and the latter are pragmatic machiavellian moral relativists.

Well, that's a whole different topic - the 1st and the 14th are not "penumbras."

But I guess from your posts that, if you live a town that is dominated by Muslims, it is fine and dandy if the school requires praying to Mecca five times a day, and it is fine and dandy if the town imposes Sharia - the constitution is not violated, and if you don't like it you can just move. That is the the impact of your theory.

Unless the Constitution is interpreted AS THE FRAMERS INTENDED

And who decides how the Constitution is interpreted? Who decides what the Framers intended? Where can we find that? If you say, "Look at the Constitution," it's a circular argument.