Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Use the original texts: original intent or textualism?
Line 107: Line 107:     
::::Obvious?  Seems to me you're injecting the meanings ''you'' want based on ''your'' ideas about what the text ''should'' say. [[User:AngusF|AngusF]] 10:13, 6 October 2009 (EDT)
 
::::Obvious?  Seems to me you're injecting the meanings ''you'' want based on ''your'' ideas about what the text ''should'' say. [[User:AngusF|AngusF]] 10:13, 6 October 2009 (EDT)
 +
 +
::::: I have an open mind about this.  There is a different between "original intent," which is what we've suggested, and "textualism", which seems to be what you want (or you may simply be criticizing this project for political reasons).  I tend to think "original intent" is a better approach, but welcome other comments and suggestions.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:26, 6 October 2009 (EDT)
    
==Treading dangerous ground==
 
==Treading dangerous ground==
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,208

edits

Navigation menu