Brewha read what I said again. If religion enters her decision making then she is no longer interpreting the constitution. This may very well happen. But I will believe her untill she proves otherwise.
Frank, I consider the constitution to be one of the greatest documents ever written. It must be interpreted for its original meaning. If a change to the constitution needs to be made it is done by amendment. No one has the right to arbitrarily change the meaning of the constitution. Your last statement is silly and you know it. The real question is what constitues a militia today given the meaning militia had when the constitution was written? That is what must be interpreted.
Speyside wrote:
actually, that is my point.
The original words must cede to original intent over time.
And by definition we move to discussion about original intent, not words, as the world (and words) evolves.
Hopefully we will reach consensus about original intent.
Originally, Blacks and women of any color could not vote.
The original words left them out. But future citizens discussed the intent and made those changes.
Probably would have encountered opposition from the original originalists.
The original words omitted AR15's (forgive me if I picked the wrong weapon).
But future citizens discussed that and other weapons and made changes.
One day very little will be the original words. Hopefully we will settle on what was the original intent.
