Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Missing The Target By A Country Mile...

Four Supreme Court justices make the case against constitutional rights...

 "On Monday the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment applies to states and cities as well as the federal government. Judging from their objections, the four dissenters were still reeling from the Court's landmark 2008 decision recognizing that the amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms.

In their dissenting opinions, Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer (joined by ("JOAN" is her REAL first name: Fits) Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor) worry that overturning gun control laws undermines democracy. If "the people" want to ban handguns, they say, "the people" should be allowed to implement that desire through their elected representatives.

What if the people want to ban books that offend them, establish an official church, or authorize police to conduct warrantless searches at will? Those options are also foreclosed by constitutional provisions that apply to the states by way of the 14th Amendment. The crucial difference between a pure democracy and a constitutional democracy like ours is that sometimes the majority does not decide.

...But unlike equal protection or freedom of speech, Stevens says, "firearms have a fundamentally ambivalent relationship to liberty." How so? "Just as they can help homeowners defend their families and property from intruders," he explains, "they can help thugs and insurrectionists murder innocent victims."

Every right can be abused, with results that are immoral, illegal, or both. Freedom of speech can be used to spread hateful ideas, promote pernicious political philosophies, slander the innocent, or engage in criminal conspiracies. If there were no potential for harm from exercising a right, there would be no need to protect it, because no one would try to restrict it."

Seemingly within minutes of the release of the dissenters opinion, fools such as Chuckie Schumer were quoting verbatim from their dissent, which should lead people of good will to believe that the dissenters were themselves quoting from that far-left gospel, created of course to minimize the Constitution as much as possible...BECAUSE...that's what the Constitution should be all about anyway.

Cannot have a "breathing, living, evolving, ever-changing" Constitution fer chrissake that doesn't even make mention of the RIGHT to ABORTION.

"They", meaning the Schumers of the country, like to quote Ginsberg, while "we" like to quote Jefferson, and "they" cannot even tell why "we" laugh in their faces so very often.

No comments: