Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:"What I find interesting is how..." (Score 1) 1173

by sideslash (#46769745) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment
In this context, "go away" is an expression that approximately means "let's mod this down into oblivion", which is exactly what happened (so far).

You are making some decent points (some, not all of which I agree with), but the original poster was just advocating blind deference to academics. In this context, that is the wrong answer, as any doofus in civics class could tell you.

Comment: Re:"What I find interesting is how..." (Score 1) 1173

by sideslash (#46768843) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment
I agree on some level, but with caveats -- if words don't mean anything, then the rule of law is a joke and tyranny is that much easier. As written, the 2nd Amendment doesn't allow the government to disallow gun ownership. So to the anti-gun lobby I say, "Change the constitution or get outta here."

Comment: Re:Bad suggestion (Score 1) 1173

by sideslash (#46768749) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment
The mention of the well regulated militia is one specific desirable goal, and the right of all the people to bear arms is the general freedom that enables the previously mentioned goal. The thought progresses from the specific to the general, and it's a mistake to read the right to bear arms as exclusively related to militias.

Comment: Re:"What I find interesting is how..." (Score 3, Insightful) 1173

by sideslash (#46767963) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment
Your opinion is so wrong, it's not funny. America is not about the masses sitting at the feet of a former Supreme Court justice to learn how to interpret the Constitution. It has been the expectation for all of our country's existence that all of us will be educated in our civil liberties and have a good understanding of them. Something as basic as the 2nd Amendment is ABSOLUTELY NOT above our heads. So get out of here, doofus, because you're making me mad.

Comment: Bad suggestion (Score 4, Insightful) 1173

by sideslash (#46767907) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment
Since Stevens' change has the purpose of exactly contradicting the original intent, it seems shoddy and absurd to just change one little phrase in it. For example, the "of a free state" part becomes a joke, or at least a meaningless window dressing, once this amendment ceases to be about guaranteeing a specific freedom to the people. In other words, Stevens' modified amendment is capable of fitting in very nicely with the goals of a tyranny, and has nothing to do with increasing the power of the people to prevent a powerful government from taking away their freedoms. But maybe Mr. Stevens really anticipates his suggestion going mainstream, and supposes that by leaving the form of the original in place, 2nd Amendment supporters will be unable to effectively oppose the change?

Regardless, I personally smell a rat.

Comment: Re:It's not enough (Score 1) 202

by sideslash (#46755635) Attached to: Mozilla Appoints Former Marketing Head Interim CEO
The bakery incident is tricky. I can think of situations where it's obviously in the public's best interest to disallow discrimination, and situations where it seems like ridiculous nanny statism. For example, should a Jewish painter be required to accept a commissioned painting with heavily Christian themes? I'd suggest not. Everybody has to eat, but it seems to me that the government should leave artistic expression alone. Does that make sense? You may disagree, which is fine...

Comment: Re:It's not enough (Score 1) 202

by sideslash (#46752717) Attached to: Mozilla Appoints Former Marketing Head Interim CEO
Sorry, my dear AC. It doesn't really matter whether you want to quibble about whether Emanuel's public statement amounted to efforts/actions/etc. The alderman's actions that Emanuel was tacitly supporting were so utterly and obviously illegal under our constitution that this whole debate we're having is an exercise in silliness. I grant your point that the alderman took the action, and Emanual made a public statement in support of it. So what? I lump them both in the "Irish need not apply" camp.

Nothing is rich but the inexhaustible wealth of nature. She shows us only surfaces, but she is a million fathoms deep. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Working...