SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (73114)8/22/2003 9:13:33 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 82486
 
It was not a cavalier fashion at all, nor was I treating children in any manner. I was treating the argument that an injustice had been done to children if they can't find a popular doll from a particular company that "looks like them", in a relatively serious manner.

If we accept that argument then for example far children are the victims of a grave injustice from Mattel. And apparently if it was the government rather then Mattel it would bring up constitutional questions. I don't buy any of that.

Tim



To: epicure who wrote (73114)8/22/2003 9:23:30 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 82486
 
Lemon is an interpretation of the constitution, by the Supreme Court, as such it is a very important interpretation of the constitution and is BINDING.

Its binding in that it will be enforced as if it where part of the constitution, but it is in fact not part of the constitution or even directly based on the words of the constitution.

Tim


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News