Post by aztecwin on Oct 13, 2009 16:09:56 GMT -8
Ignore the rulings, but just concentrate on the language. No matter how you read it or what weight you give to the "commas" it is just plain English. You might wish that it was not so and you might also side with those on the Supreme Court who would like to change the meaning to match what they feel about the issue, but it is plain as the
I crossed out the part that I was not sure of since I don't think we have met.
As I said. You read it one way and I read it another.
I suggest that no matter how you read it, that it says that the right shall not be infringed. It does not create a new right, but makes sure that the existing right will not be infringed.