Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tacticalogic
I find that a wholly unsupportable conclusion.

Obviously, you're entitled to your own opinion and conclusions. I find it unsupportable that someone should undermine the plain language of a Constitution written for "We, the People" by saying the actual written words are less authoritative than the opinion of an individual.
43 posted on 10/04/2006 8:20:37 AM PDT by Gorjus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: Gorjus
Obviously, you're entitled to your own opinion and conclusions. I find it unsupportable that someone should undermine the plain language of a Constitution written for "We, the People" by saying the actual written words are less authoritative than the opinion of an individual.

I think that's a disingenuous mischaracterization. I think it's more like saying the author is the most authoritative source to determine the specific meanings of the words used.

Pure textualism disregards the historical context and intent of the authors. Without this, any of the possible meanings can be attributed to any of the words, and interpretation becomes a game of searching for a particular combinatation of meanings that will produce a desired result.

44 posted on 10/04/2006 8:37:35 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson