Umm, yeah. That's why they didn't let the south flood the House by counting slaves as "whole" people.<quoted text>
Do you think the founders ever believed that the Constitution would be used for freeing slaves or integration?
Anyone who has actually taken the time to study our history knows that. They also know that many of the founders were ready and willing to take on the issue of slavery at the drafting, but they felt it would result and losing everything, thus they wrote the 3/5th clause knowing by attrition the practice of slavery would bring about its own demise.
But I guess people like you whom get their historical education from comedy central don't understand that.
What does this have to do with the price of rice in china?<quoted text>
Do you think the founders had any concept of computers, subatomic particles, digital downloads, or any other technology that couldn't have been foreseen at the time of the signing?
Since Corporations are nothing more that a conglomeration of citizens, I don't think they would have much trouble with the concept.<quoted text>
Do you think the founders had any notion that the Constitution would be used to create "corporate personhood"?
Anyhow, what difference does it really make? Most corporations hedge their bets when making campaign donations anyhow, so each party comes out about even.
No you idiot. The Constitution was the end-point. It is what it is, and only changes through the Amendment process, not at the whims of the SCOTUS.<quoted text>
The Constitution was a starting point. The Supreme Court uses it to look at all manner of situations that the founders could never have fathomed.
The Constitution doesn't address the issue you marriage. The founders weren't interested in an all powerful, know and control everything federal government.<quoted text>
They make decisions based on how it has been applied in the past.
So it doesn't matter if the founders ever conceived of the Constitution being used to legalize same-sex marriage.
Actually we all lost. The court has announced to the American citizen that they "lack standing" to address the government for a redress of grievances as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment.<quoted text>
As to the rest of what you said... Meh... Get over it. You guys lost the case. Maybe next time...
But you are so near sighted, you can't see beyond- YAY, I can marry a dude..