Monday, April 11, 2016

Where does it stop?

One thing that struck a chord with me dealt with the interpretation of the 14th amendment. If the majority so wanted their decision to be remembered so well, one would think they would have built a solid argument, while addressing dissenting opinions. Instead, they just interpreted the amendment in such a way to get their desired outcome. This is what worries me. If they made an amendment suit their argument for one thing, what stops someone else from using it to legalize other things? What precedent does this set for the future interpretation of any amendment? It reminds me of the saying, “Give people an inch, and they’ll take it a mile."
I commented on Abbey Griffin's post!

2 comments:

  1. Yes!! It is frustrating and disheartening to see that they were able to get away with their own interpretation, fitting it into their own mold of sorts. You're right - if they did this for one argument, what's to stop someone for justifying another argument by following this example?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Amen! They are twisting the original meaning to suit what is best for them in this specific situation. If we allow this wiggle room, what other things will spew from it?

    ReplyDelete