Why Can't The State Accede To The

Certainly One Cannot Ban Cross Burning In The Sanctity Of His Bedroom.

The Court's Decision Reflects The Philosophy That Judges Should Endure Whatever Interpretive Distortions It Takes In Order To Correct A Supposed Flaw In The Statutory Machinery. That Philosophy Ignores The American People's Decision To Give Congress '[a]ll Legislative Powers' Enumerated In The Constitution. They Made Congress, Not This Court, Responsible For Both Making Laws And Mending Them.

A Law Can Be Both Economic Folly And Constitutional.

Nowhere Else In The Constitution Does A "right" Attributed To "the People" Refer To Anything Other Than An Individual Right. What Is More, In All Six Other Provisions Of The Constitution That Mention "the People," The Term Unambiguously Refers To All Members Of The Political Community, Not An Unspecified Subset... The Second Amendment Extends, Prima Facie, To All Instruments That Constitute Bearable Arms... The Very Text Of The Second Amendment Implicitly Recognizes The Pre-existence Of The Right And Declares Only That It "shall Not Be Infringed."

Who Ever Thought That Intimacy And Spirituality [whatever That Means] Were Freedoms? And If Intimacy Is, One Would Think Freedom Of Intimacy Is Abridged Rather Than Expanded By Marriage. Ask The Nearest Hippie.