Ed Huntress wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
Here are a few of he bunch that wish it were the facts: Google book
search.

It isn't clear what you mean by "wish it were the facts," but putting that
aside for a moment, tell us what you think about a few issues, so we can get
an idea of how living or dead you think the Constitution is -- in other
words, just what kind of Constitutional doctrine you may apply.

1) Do you think that there is a right to privacy that Congress or the
administration can't infringe? If so, how is it defined as a right, and how
is it defended?

2) Do you believe that the First and the Second Amendments apply to the
states? Or can they establish a state religion and confiscate all guns?

3) What do you think the limits are to eminent domain? Can a state condemn
your house if they want to make more tax money on some kind of business that
would replace it? If not, why not?

4) What do you think the 9th and 10th Amendments mean?

5) What do the think is the proper interpretation of the "equal protection"
and "due process" clauses? Do they mean that the entire Bill of Rights
applies directly to the people, over the heads of the states?

Obviously, I chose these for a reason. The answers tend to leave
"originalists" wondering if that's what they really believe. But we'll be
very interested to hear your answers.

--
Ed Huntress

I don't know the answers to all those questions but it seems to me
that the "living constitution" is being used to ram through new
laws which congress and the people would never vote for. This is the
perfect system for liberals to change society into their fantasy system
without considering the will of the majority.

The right to privacy was found somewhere in the "vapors" of the
Constitution and it was used to say that it's constitutional to do away
with your unborn child. I don't believe that "right" was ever there.

If the people want that right in the constution or in other laws they
are certainly able to pass additional amendments or laws as necessary.
That's the way it was set up, not that unelected judges make new laws
with no accountability to the people.
GW