"That is false. Unpopular Court decisions have been part of its entire history, read about it you might learn something. I don't think you understand the constitution very well or are knowledgeable about American constitutional history or politics. There are numerous good books which could help. One really good one is John Marshall, Interpreter of the Constitution by Jean Smith."I don't care about "unpopular" Court rulings. I care about rulings that are blatent violations of the Constitution (such as the Affirmative Action College Admisions case ruling that Sandra Day O'Connor just farted).
"There are numerous good books which could help. One really good one is John Marshall, Interpreter of the Constitution by Jean Smith."
This quote facinates me. It betrays EXACTLY where you are comming from and it ain't pretty. You accuse me of being ignorant of the Constitution and suggest that I read.......NOT the Constitution, but.................. a book about an "interpreter" of the Constitution.
The Constitution is written in English, not 'Martian', Chinese, or any other real, fictional, dead, or other type of language. To study the Constitution, you need to be able to read and understand English, a copy of the Constitution and several dictionaries to cross-reference any word whos meaning needs elaboration. You DON'T need John Marshal's spin on it, or Jean Smith's spin on John Marshal's spin on it. I've collected the definition of "militia" from 7 different dictionaries, so far, and they all point to one thing. It ain't what Sarah Brady thinks. There's one example of a good start on the proper study of the Constitution. If you want a history of what judges have ruled, that's another topic.
Sorry, son but you are no expert on what the constitution means. But all opinions are welcome.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt, despite plentiful evidence to the contrary, that you HAD read the constitution. Like all great literary works it is a deep work and, like the Bible, has generated millions of pages of commentaries for those who are interested in such things.
It is particularly useful to study and understand the Constitution's greatest exponents and advocates such as Marshall, Hamilton and Madison. No one can claim to be knowledgeable about the constitution without having read the Federalist and Marshall's landmark opinions which have shaped our nation's laws for 200 years. Apparently you are unaware that what the judges have ruled is called Constitutional law, a subject you pretend an interest in, sorry if I took you at your word.
As far as militia goes Illinois' constitution defines it as "every able-bodied adult." That is good enough for me and that is what was meant in the constitution with man in place of adult.