Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Normal
Exactly. Laws outside the 14th amendment concerning census determine the restrictions. Amendment 2 of the constitution itself applies to persons but does not forbid minors to bear arms. Here you are saying that there are different degrees of persons for which the constitution applies. This certainly makes sense. However in post # 141 you emphatically claim the opposite.You are now contradicting yourself. It is very obvious that every amendment of the constitution does not apply to every kind of person. In some cases the restrictions are spelled out, and in others they are not. As you say, it is law outside the constitution that sometimes provides the restrictions.When it comes to Roe v. Wade, that is a ruling outside the constitution that provides restrictions on how Amendment 14 is interpreted and is no different in principle than the restrictions on Amendment 2.Your attempt to eliminate all restrictions on how persons are defined, is not a viable way to proceed. You need to do that in order to promote your argument about abortion rights, yet you back away from it when it doesn't suit you.My analogizing the dead to the living highlights the inherent weakness of your argument.
Exactly. Laws outside the 14th amendment concerning census determine the restrictions. Amendment 2 of the constitution itself applies to persons but does not forbid minors to bear arms. Here you are saying that there are different degrees of persons for which the constitution applies. This certainly makes sense. However in post # 141 you emphatically claim the opposite.
You are now contradicting yourself. It is very obvious that every amendment of the constitution does not apply to every kind of person. In some cases the restrictions are spelled out, and in others they are not. As you say, it is law outside the constitution that sometimes provides the restrictions.
When it comes to Roe v. Wade, that is a ruling outside the constitution that provides restrictions on how Amendment 14 is interpreted and is no different in principle than the restrictions on Amendment 2.
Your attempt to eliminate all restrictions on how persons are defined, is not a viable way to proceed. You need to do that in order to promote your argument about abortion rights, yet you back away from it when it doesn't suit you.
My analogizing the dead to the living highlights the inherent weakness of your argument.