The Castle Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Castle

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TimF who wrote (2793)	2/18/2004 7:18:50 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) of 7936

I'm not sure I agree with that statement. I would agree only to the extent that sometimes reading it literally doesn't give you something specific to really be sure how it applies to a particular issue, but when it is reasonably clear I think it should be read fairly literally. Well, let's take just two examples. Amendment XIII -- "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime...shall exist within the United States...." Reconcile a literal reading of that language with the military draft. (Definitions of servitude: servitude. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000. 1a. A state of subjection to an owner or master. b. Lack of personal freedom, as to act as one chooses. 2. Forced labor ...) Or, consider "congress shall make now law ... abridging the freedom of speech .." There are, of course, many such laws. It's a crime in wartime to reveal the movement of troops. It's a crime to yell Fire in a crowded theater. It's a crime to burn two pieces of wood on your front lawn if those pieces of wood are fastened in the shape of a cross. No law doesn't really mean no law. Need I go on?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next