Quote:
Originally posted by: Mavdog
The bottom line with Schlaffy and those who follow her lead is they want freedom of speech...as long as it's speech which they approve of. She and her Eagle Forum cohorts are shooting for a Joe McCarthy redux.
The most telling statement of all is this gem from Ms. Schlaffy: "The Constitution is not what the Supreme Court says it is," Schlafly asserted.
uh, yes Phyliss, if you were to read up on the US Constitution that is part of what the SCOUS does. They protect us from people like you who want to pervert and deny the freedoms granted in that document.
|
Mavdog, I think there seem to be two interpretations of Phyliss' quote:
Option #1: The Constitution isn't supposed to be interpreted by the Supreme court, or
Option #2: The Supreme Court isn't interpreting the Constitution according to the way the founding fathers' intentions....
Option #1 seems to be your interpretation, and I would like to ask you to consider another possibility: My interpretation is #2. I was raised in this right wing conservative culture, and I know they aren't ignorant of what the constitution explicitly states. I also know that they believe our founding fathers intended for our country to head in a very different direction when it comes to separation of church and state. Therefore, I am fairly confident that she was restating (for the millionth time) that the Supreme Court is mis-interpreting the Constituiton (in her opinion).
Disclaimor: This post is not intended to be an endorsement of Phyliss Schlaffly's statements or opinions. I'm just trying to clear up a possible misconception. I think we all learn, grow and find areas of agreement/compromise when we are fully aware of our "opponents" true beliefs.
Thank you for indulging me by reading this far-from-genious response. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]