Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Arizona's anti-imigration law...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="trplnkl" data-source="post: 814916" data-attributes="member: 13254"><p>There have been many decisions made by the SC that vary from what the framers had intended, using the idea that the constitution was an ever changing document. I suppose there is argument for that, but there is little, if any substantial, evidence that the framers ever intended for that to happen. If the "supportable in the context of 21st century America" is the criteria it should be applied to ALL of the document and we both know that isn't the trend nor the original plan. There is a process that the framers supplied for changing the constitution to a newer environment and/or protect the people, however they stated pretty plain their intentions in many other ways. Using the "supportable in the context of 21st century America" argument could, would, should disallow the so called "anchor babies" of illegal immigrants because when that amendment was written they didn't know that the 21st century would bring about the numbers of people coming here just to have their babies so they could circumvent our laws.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="trplnkl, post: 814916, member: 13254"] There have been many decisions made by the SC that vary from what the framers had intended, using the idea that the constitution was an ever changing document. I suppose there is argument for that, but there is little, if any substantial, evidence that the framers ever intended for that to happen. If the "supportable in the context of 21st century America" is the criteria it should be applied to ALL of the document and we both know that isn't the trend nor the original plan. There is a process that the framers supplied for changing the constitution to a newer environment and/or protect the people, however they stated pretty plain their intentions in many other ways. Using the "supportable in the context of 21st century America" argument could, would, should disallow the so called "anchor babies" of illegal immigrants because when that amendment was written they didn't know that the 21st century would bring about the numbers of people coming here just to have their babies so they could circumvent our laws. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Arizona's anti-imigration law...
Top