3 ms·
That doesn't mean they're against the amendment, just that they disagree with your interpretation of it.
by ikiris 4y ago
That doesn't mean they're against the amendment, just that they disagree with your interpretation of it.
- vorpalhex 4y agoAnd Heller, and non-binding opinions of it from the last 200 years. If I interpret the first amendment to only apply to brown eyed people, and then defend that very odd interpretation, am I still a defender of the first amendment?
- mLuby 4y agoIf you interpret the 4th amendment's "papers" to mean only tree-based sheets, not documents which might be electronic, are you really a defender of the 4th amendment? > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…
- cperciva 4y agoIf you want to be etymologically pedantic, "papers" should mean only sheets of papyrus.