US Criticises French Headscarf Ban

[Imran Siddiqui]

The common use of "liberalizing" implies liberalizing society, not the constraints on gov't.

We are talking about the Constitution here. Liberalizing and constraining in that context refers to the government not society.

[Ramo]

Dude Imran you've been up too long.

Liberalizing the foundation of a gov't means constraining the gov't into a liberal path.

[Ramo]

The Bill of Rights for instance were extremely liberal ideas. That's the sort of thing Locke et al. were advoacting.

[Kirnwaffen]

Still the court did nothing for 50 years after that, hence "in earnest" :P

That's entirely untrue. There were at least five huge court decisions in that time period that, though not particularly well known, had huge consequences for the US.

Dartmouth v. Woodward (1812)
Fletcher v. Peck (1812)
McCullough v. Maryland (1819)
Cohens v. Virginia (1821)
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

All of these cases expanded or affirmed federal power.

[Kirnwaffen]

The Bill of Rights for instance were extremely liberal ideas. That's the sort of thing Locke et al. were advoacting.

That really has nothing to do with SCOTUS liberalizing the Constitution, though.

[Ramo]

It has to do with liberalizing the Constitution.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Liberalizing the foundation of a gov't means constraining the gov't into a liberal path.

Have you been drinking? Or using different defintions of liberal?

Liberalizing means freeing. Liberalizing the Constitution means freeing it from its text. A liberal reading of the Constitution means not adhering too strongly to the text.

The Bill of Rights for instance were extremely liberal ideas.

That has nothing to do with liberalizing it.

[Ramo]

Liberalizing the Constitution means making the Constitution more liberal!

[Kirnwaffen]

Wait, screwed up. Fletcher v. Peck and Dartmouth v. Woodward are about property rights and contracts. However, they are still important.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes... more free from the text. Not politically liberal.

When used that way, liberal means freeing from strict adherence (ie, a liberal reading)

[Ramo]

It makes much more sense if he means politically liberal. Which is why the assertion came out of an argument about the establishment clause initially meaning only among Christians (which I agree with yavoon with BTW - hence my example of religious missions to heathens).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Which is why the assertion came out of an argument about the establishment clause initially meaning only among Christians

A. It wasn't a discussion on the Establishment Clause, but Free Exercise Clause. He says that:

I think its also pretty safe to say that by freedom of religion they meant freedom of the different christian denominations. not freedom of paganism or aetheism.

B. It also seems false. If you look at the history of the 1st Amendment (the 19 versions before the one which was settled on) and the debates over it, the debates seemed to center on a freedom of conscious for all, not just Christians.

C. If he meant more political liberal, then he used the terminology wrong as well.

[Ramo]

Ok he was wrong about the free exercise clause. But the last statement still makes much more sense if he meant politically liberal, which makes it correct.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But the last statement still makes much more sense if he meant politically liberal, which makes it correct.

You are making the assumption that yavoon usually makes sense .

[Whoha]

bleh, I am defeated.