I found this post on the USAToday poll about the Second Amendment and was quite impressed. Your thoughts? (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=270341)
Don
==============
Diogenes Sinope wrote:
Let us try rewording the text of the Second Amendment to address a different Constitutional right and see where it takes us, OK?
"A well educated electorate, being necessary to the maintenance of a free State, the right of the People to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."
Since the first clause references "electorate" does that mean only enfranchised citizen who are qualified to vote have the right to keep and read books? This would eliminate all children and even women, since they were not entitled to vote when the Constitution was adopted. And if the word "electorate" is deemed to include only registered voters then the to right to keep and read books pertains only to those who are actually registered to vote.
The second clause refers to "maintenance of a free State". Does that limit the books which the People are entitled to "keep and read" to those which promote said maintenance of the State? If such is the case, then the only books that the Constitutional right covers are those on the subjects of government, politics, and civic virtue. The government can censor or ban all books on fiction, comedy, poetry, philosophy or any other "irrelevant" topic. And don't even />think< about romantic novels.
Furthermore, since the Founding Fathers could not anticipate modern means of communication such as textmail, e-mail, internet, radio, and television you have no Constitutionally guaranteed right to receive information from any of those sources either.
All of this contractual contortionism is patently absurd, of course, but it is the very argument which is espoused by those legal limbo-dancers who are politically unwilling or intellectually unable to honestly parse that simple phrase
"... the right of the People .."
Don
==============
Diogenes Sinope wrote:
Let us try rewording the text of the Second Amendment to address a different Constitutional right and see where it takes us, OK?
"A well educated electorate, being necessary to the maintenance of a free State, the right of the People to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."
Since the first clause references "electorate" does that mean only enfranchised citizen who are qualified to vote have the right to keep and read books? This would eliminate all children and even women, since they were not entitled to vote when the Constitution was adopted. And if the word "electorate" is deemed to include only registered voters then the to right to keep and read books pertains only to those who are actually registered to vote.
The second clause refers to "maintenance of a free State". Does that limit the books which the People are entitled to "keep and read" to those which promote said maintenance of the State? If such is the case, then the only books that the Constitutional right covers are those on the subjects of government, politics, and civic virtue. The government can censor or ban all books on fiction, comedy, poetry, philosophy or any other "irrelevant" topic. And don't even />think< about romantic novels.
Furthermore, since the Founding Fathers could not anticipate modern means of communication such as textmail, e-mail, internet, radio, and television you have no Constitutionally guaranteed right to receive information from any of those sources either.
All of this contractual contortionism is patently absurd, of course, but it is the very argument which is espoused by those legal limbo-dancers who are politically unwilling or intellectually unable to honestly parse that simple phrase
"... the right of the People .."
Last edited: