Where in the US Constitution does it mention "abortion" or "marriage"?

[eman926]

I know. And jim crow laws should be legal....right?

The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments addressed that.

 

[vegas giants]

You do realize that we are not actually a democracy anyways, right? That's actually a state issue too. The amendments say what you cannot say what groups can't vote, but if a state wanted no one to vote, that's allowed.

Not groups. You have no right to.vote at all federally

Voting rights are not prescribed in the constitution

 

[Questerr]

Re: Where in the US Constitution does it mention "abortion" or "marriage"?

You’re talking about ACTIVIST JUDGES, not Constitutional judges. And yes, it was supposed to be read literally. No, the Constitution was NEVER a “living document” like lefties claim! I still doubt you’ve read much of the Constitution anyways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What is the "literal meaning" of "regulate interstate commerce". Give an objective definition of that with ZERO interpretation.

 

[ataraxia]

Quote Originally Posted by ataraxia View Post
Constitution doesn’t mention the Air Force either.

So what? The military is included in the Constitution. If you want to add to the military, it doesn't exclude that.

Constitution says nothing about “the military”. It specifically mentions only the army and the Navy. Why do you take liberties with constitutional interpretation that way? You just have to read what’s there and stop it with the interpretations. The Air Force may just be a slippery slope for the libtards to expand the size of government, right? They will start with that, and next thing you know they will want to exclude nuclear arms from the 2A phrase “the right to bear arms shall not be infringed”. Give them an inch, they will take a while.

 

[eman926]

Re: Where in the US Constitution does it mention "abortion" or "marriage"?

not according to the constitution, which you haven't read

I've read the ENTIRE CONSTITUTION. You read the likes of Howard Zinn. News flash for you, "A People's History of the United States" has been debunked several times.

 

[soylentgreen]

probably enamored with the 3/5 compromise of the original document:

Three-fifths compromise | History, Slavery, & Significance | Britannica

I love his argument. Which is all his thinking has been done for him. He just needs to sit back and watch the **** fly.

 

[eman926]

Constitution says nothing about “the military”. It specifically mentions only the army and the Navy. Why do you take liberties with constitutional interpretation that way? You just have to read what’s there and stop it with the interpretations. The Air Force may just be a slippery slope for the libs to expand the size of government, right?

Army and Navy are still military.

 

[vegas giants]

The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments addressed that.

Uh....they did that for gay marriage too. Why cant a state say we can have separate drinking fountains

Are drinking fountains a right?

 

[eman926]

I love his argument. Which is all his thinking has been done for him. He just needs to sit back and watch the **** fly.

The Constitution: A Pro-Slavery or Anti-Slavery Document?

Nevertheless, the delegates from South Carolina responded that “Interest alone is the governing principle with nations,” and their interests demanded that no restrictions against slavery be incorporated into the Constitution. It was Roger Sherman who urged compromise on the issue, on the grounds that “the abolition of Slavery seemed to be going on in the U.S. & that the good sense of the several States would probably by degrees compleat it.” “Slavery,” predicted Oliver Ellsworth, “in time will not be a speck in our Country.” Hence, the final version of the Constitution contained no explicit allusion to slavery. But it did arrange representation in the new House of Representatives by a calculation that permitted the counting of “three-fifths” of “all other Persons” beyond those who were “free” (Article 1, Section 2); provided for the rendition of fugitives “held to Service or Labour” (Article 4, Section 2); and permitted Congress to terminate the “Migration or Importation of such Persons” after 20 years (Article 1, Section 9).

 

[soylentgreen]

This is coming from people who read Howard Zinn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have no idea who he is.

And thanks for another failed attempt to why anyone would bother with original intent. Except as i have sad that thinking is over rated in your opinion.

 

[joluoto]

Re: Where in the US Constitution does it mention "abortion" or "marriage"?

No, actually it’s up to the states.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, that is if you amend the Constitution. The highest authority for interpreting the Constitution is the SCOTUS.

 

[Questerr]

No, I go by it’s original intent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You go by the intent of landed White Supremacist aristocrats who owned slaves and treated women as de facto property?

 

[eman926]

You go by the intent of landed White Supremacist aristocrats who owned slaves and treated women as de facto property?

No, I go by the fact that the Founders wanted a CAPITALIST, non-monarchy, Republic, which allowed for amending certain wrongs.

 

[Questerr]

Most states actually had it banned. Even leftist Wikipedia shows that!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most states also had legalized marital rape for well over a hundred years.

 

[eman926]

Re: Where in the US Constitution does it mention "abortion" or "marriage"?

No, that is if you amend the Constitution. The highest authority for interpreting the Constitution is the SCOTUS.

Yeah, but judges aren't supposed to be activists and make the law be whatever they want it to be.

 

[eman926]

Most states also had legalized marital rape for well over a hundred years.

And then they criminalized it! It's funny, I bet you love California's laws! Even though they legalized pedophilia lately! People are leaving that state like crazy. And they are going to RED STATES! Shows how this works!

 

[joluoto]

Re: Where in the US Constitution does it mention "abortion" or "marriage"?

Yeah, but judges aren't supposed to be activists and make the law be whatever they want it to be.

The SCOTUS is supposed to take cases where the federal courts around the country has acted differently and there thus is a confusion over how a federal law or a Constitutional Amendment is supposed to be interpreted in this specific circumstance. Usually it is because a new phenomena has appeared and exactly how it fit or doesn't fit within a law is unclear. If the SCOTUS grants certiorary to an applicant, it's because there is a conflict how this the law is supposed to be interpreted, and the SCOTUS need to set a precedent that other courts can follow.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Where in the US Constitution does it mention "abortion" or "marriage"?

But it's not in the Constitution. Especially if you read the 5th and 14th Amendments.

And if you read the 9th Amendment...as I've said over and over...you'd realize that it doesnt have to be named to be a right. Having consensual sex isnt named in the Const but no state can make it illegal. Having kids isnt named in the Const, but no state can forbid people from doing so.

Anything not specifically enumerated (called out) in the Const automatically is recognized for 'the people.' I gave you a kid's law version, linked, that explains this :doh

What part of this dont you understand???? You obviously dont understand what you read, IF you read the Const.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Lursa]

Re: Where in the US Constitution does it mention "abortion" or "marriage"?

I've read the ENTIRE CONSTITUTION. You read the likes of Howard Zinn. News flash for you, "A People's History of the United States" has been debunked several times.

But you dont understand it. You dont understand the meaning of the 9th Amendment, for ex.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Questerr]

No, I go by the fact that the Founders wanted a CAPITALIST, non-monarchy, Republic, which allowed for amending certain wrongs.

The Founders were alive when Marbury v Madison happened. They had no problem with judicial review. None of them spoke out against it.

 

[Questerr]

And then they criminalized it! It's funny, I bet you love California's laws! Even though they legalized pedophilia lately! People are leaving that state like crazy. And they are going to RED STATES! Shows how this works!

Why would you lie when its so easy to fact check you? California has not in any way "legalized pedophilia". What does that Bible of yours say about bearing false witness?

 

[Questerr]

So what? The military is included in the Constitution. If you want to add to the military, it doesn't exclude that.

Armies and Navies are in the Constitution. Nowhere does it allow for an Air Force.

 

[Questerr]

Read the 5th Amendment and also read the 14th Amendment AGAIN. "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Apparently all human beings are supposed to be equally protected.

They are equally protected. No one has the right to use the body of another person against that person's will, even if it means saving their own life.

 

[itstony]

I do know it’s not a “living document”, in which it “means whatever I want it to mean”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's comments like these that made me choose my avatar. You need to take a civics class and no, not about Hondas. It is a living document as it sets forth the basic principles to create and change laws. If the people want laws for or against any specific action there's a process for that. That's why elections matter, we choose people that represent our values and we hold them accountable for change.

Have we as a nation really descended to a place where we no longer understand the Constitution?

 

[Questerr]

Corporations are run by PEOPLE. And they have free speech.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then those people can engage in free speech on their own.