[lbo-talk] 2d Amendment/Rule of Law (Was: The curse of literacy)

[andie nachgeborenen]

If you use words in a way that most people will understand as saying p, but you meant to say q by them, and you get them enacted into law, you have enacted p, not q. So the franers of the 14th Amendment might have intended only to protect the civil and political rights of Blacks, and not to promote social equality, when they enacted the equal protection clause, but the language they used, correctly interpreted, made social equality the law of the land.

lweiger at umich.edu wrote:
> I am not, as I have said impressed by arguments about
> original intent - whether from Justice Scalia or Dan
> Lazare. Who cares what they meant, if what they said
> is clear?
>
> So that's what I think.
>
> jks

I think I agree with you, but doesn't what you mean to say have a lot to do with
the meaning of what you say?

-- Luke
___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <../attachments/20040723/fed2208c/attachment.htm>