If An American Believes In The Constitution But Doesn't Believe Th

[Winchester]

This question was posed.

Women may vote once their sammich duties are discharged.

[Nihil Obstat]

Due to your position, we must all refuse to call you an American.

[Winchester]

Canadians can vote, too. Once they've finished rioting.

[ThePenciledOne]

Super poor poll Winne.

[Winchester]

The question is valid, and it deserves an answer. Public opinion is a traditional American value.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308342717' post='2255255']
The question is valid, and it deserves an answer. Public opinion is a traditional American value.
[/quote]
Your interpretation of the Constitution excludes you from being a real American. I think you must be French, or, God forbid, Canadian.

[Cam42]

I love you.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1308342755' post='2255257']
Your interpretation of the Constitution excludes you from being a real American. I think you must be French, or, God forbid, Canadian.
[/quote]
I believe the Constitution encourages people to believe however they will.

Acting on it is another matter.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308342968' post='2255263']
I believe the Constitution encourages people to believe however they will.

Acting on it is another matter.
[/quote]

I love that.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308342968' post='2255263']
I believe the Constitution encourages people to believe however they will.

Acting on it is another matter.
[/quote]
From what I know of the American Constitution, it seems to me that some aspects are relatively clear, and some have been open to interpretation throughout the years. There has been a general consensus on most of those issues over time (obviously a different debate on whether or not they were the right interpretations). I think though, that an American could call himself a constitutionalist and differ on interpretations of minor areas than another American who calls himself a constitutionalist. That's not to say that both interpretations are right... just that he's still a constitutionalist with a slightly flawed understanding of that specific issue.

[Ash Wednesday]

Looking for the third option that just says "Sammich"

I would vote for it.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' timestamp='1308343284' post='2255274']
Looking for the third option that just says "Sammich"

I would vote for it.
[/quote]

I love sammiches...as long as they are made by my sisters and sometimes my brothers....especially two hours before Mass, because then I know that I am good for the fast.

I love that.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1308343192' post='2255271']
From what I know of the American Constitution, it seems to me that some aspects are relatively clear, and some have been open to interpretation throughout the years. There has been a general consensus on most of those issues over time (obviously a different debate on whether or not they were the right interpretations). I think though, that an American could call himself a constitutionalist and differ on interpretations of minor areas than another American who calls himself a constitutionalist. That's not to say that both interpretations are right... just that he's still a constitutionalist with a slightly flawed understanding of that specific issue.
[/quote]
I believe the Constitution grants women the legal right to vote, even without an amendment to clarify the matter.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308343435' post='2255279']
I believe the Constitution grants women the legal right to vote, even without an amendment to clarify the matter.
[/quote]

I love that women can vote.....

and make sammiches.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308343435' post='2255279']
I believe the Constitution grants women the legal right to vote, even without an amendment to clarify the matter.
[/quote]
Absolutely.
However, let's say that in 1920, lots of constitutional scholars were debating on the 19th amendment (I don't really know how that went down, but that sounds mostly reasonable to me. ). I imagine some of them were against it entirely, some though it was already implicit in the constitution, and some felt that an amendment was needed. I think we can call all of them constitutionalists (if their other views generally lined up with what we accept as constitutionalism), because they'd be debating based on the constitution itself.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1308343745' post='2255286']
Absolutely.
However, let's say that in 1920, lots of constitutional scholars were debating on the 19th amendment (I don't really know how that went down, but that sounds mostly reasonable to me. ). I imagine some of them were against it entirely, some though it was already implicit in the constitution, and some felt that an amendment was needed. I think we can call all of them constitutionalists (if their other views generally lined up with what we accept as constitutionalism), because they'd be debating based on the constitution itself.
[/quote]

But how are sammiches and sammich making unconstitutional? And why is it being argued?

[MIKolbe]

Please..

no sammich v. sammich debating....

[Cam42]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1308344280' post='2255296']
Please..

no sammich v. sammich debating....
[/quote]

oh come on!!!! First no Catholic v. Catholic...now no sammich v. sammich? How am I supposed to defend hard salami? It's the best sammich meat. EVAR!!!!

I love you.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1308344280' post='2255296']
Please..

no sammich v. sammich debating....
[/quote]

[b][size="7"]A++++++++++[/size][/b]

[Cam42]

I love b-o-l-o-g-n-a too....though...