Perhaps if instead of adding your own emphasis you should look at the emphasis added in the quote. **DxZero bolds the words “It’s a living document,” making it clear, at least to Polycarp and me anyway, that his comments are in response to those emphasized words and not the bit you underlined.
Ok, guys… as demostrated Scalia has nothing but derision for the “living document” theory. I made the comment, basically to indicate that the “living document” theory has it detractors, namely a SCOTUS justice. Maybe I should have cited it, but its not like its a controversial subject that both Scalia and Thomas are originalists. They both identify themselves as such. The punching comment was a slight attempt at humor.
I quoted the whole section so it could give the comment some context. If I had just quoted “living document”, that might have been hard to follow. I did however, bold “living document”. I don’t see how I intentionally distorted the meaning. Everything is not neccesarily a political potshot.
OK, glad to hear that. I’m just confused why quoting the whole post gave it the context you were looking for, since the rest of the post actually gives it precisely the opposite context.
BTW, Scalia’s judicial philosophy is routinely mischaractarized on this board, so that gives you some context for my own post, and why I felt the need for the correction. Sorry if I mistakenly jumped to a conclusion about your motives. I’m used to seeing a smiley after a joke post in GQ.
