Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (10168)	6/17/2001 2:50:28 PM
From: Father Terrence	Respond to of 59480

As regards individual autonomy... It is NOT anarchy and the end of polite society. Those well foundationed individuals just have a more secure spot from which to lever their greater power and are able to contribute even more to the positive synergy of an efficacious team. Autonomy won't drive teams apart as much as make a team even MORE productive, intelligent, and far reaching. More people, astonishingly, not less... should carry concealed weapons, for example. I say that... not even owning a gun. Anything that leads to more individual autonomy should be busily encouraged. It adds quality to the contribution one can make to a team. That makes the care and feeding of individuals key, and NOT of secondary importance. Right now, we don't have a lot of respect for our individuals, and as the population goes steadily up, less respect all the time. -- By Alfred Lehmberg "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, scourged by the scurrilous.

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (10168)	6/17/2001 2:55:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

The Constitution, like any law, allows for the contemplation of novel cases by established interpretive methods, such as analogy, adherence to intent when the "letter" does not cover sufficiently, review of legislative history to resolve ambiguities, and so on. In that sense you are correct, it is an evolving document. However, judicial restraint and a deference to legislative authority limits how far it can "evolve". At a certain point, if one wants to change the Constitution, one must bite the bullet and offer amendments..........