The Unconstitutional Constitution, or Why Some People Shouldn’t Use Logic

This post relates to a single tweet:!/michellemalkin/status/166948277076508673

RT @arizonashane@michellemalkin Given the opportunity, the 9th Circus would strike down the Constitution as unconstitutional.

I came across it after seeing the amazingly bigoted tweet from Rick Santorum

7M Californians had their rights stripped away today by activist 9th Circuit judges. As president I will work to protect marriage.

So first off, the whole “giving people rights” thing does not actually take away the rights of anyone else. If Santorum was a member of the KKK arguing against Black Rights, or was arguing against Womens Rights and used the exact same argument he’d be committing political suicide. But no, it’s ok to say that  about homosexual couples and their right (or prevention thereof) to marry. Someone down the road getting a BMW does not prevent me from getting one either, so I fail to see how the “rights” of anyone has been “stripped away”.

Of course, if he’s arguing for the “sanctity of marriage”, why don’t they kick off a “ban divorce” campaign, or a “criminalise adultery” one? These things do more to “harm” marriage than anything else I’ve seen, so this defence is like saying you can’t light a candle because it might start a fire, but your house is already burning down.

Anyway, back to the Logic. The Constitution is what defines America, or at least is the document that it’s founded on. To say that the 9th Circuit Court would call the Constitution unconstitutional is like the old logic joke “This statement is false”. If the statement is false, it must be true, but if it’s true then the statement is false. Likewise, if the Constitution is unconstitutional then how can you define what is unconstitutional? Is everything not in the Constitution suddenly not unconstitutional when the Constitution becomes unconstitutional?

This is why people shouldn’t treat Logic like a play toy. They sometimes screw it up.

About binkenstein
I'm a geek, living in Christchurch, New Zealand.

One Response to The Unconstitutional Constitution, or Why Some People Shouldn’t Use Logic

  1. Donovitch says:

    The argument is not about the “sanctity” of marriage, but for the definition. If marriage is defined by you, I, society, or whatnot then we can define it however we want. If it is a concept that we as people simply adopted from a transcendental being (God or whatever) then it is not up to us to try to wield our opinions on. Now whether or not it is one or another, is actually a bigger question than many try to paint it.

    In addition to people plainly stating what they were told by whatever “authorities” they hold as true, show me the empirical and philosophical evidence in concrete. Because whether or not you want to believe it there is no conclusive arguments that cover the entirety of this subject and the related subjects in entirety.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: