I'm saying a reading of the 5th clearly outlaws slavery. There is literally nothing remotely questionable there without tortured logic, or seeing Black's as property.
I've pointed out a few things that exist that don't square with law and history...
No it certainly is, without question. It's the potential consequences that are the issue.
I'm not arguing it's unlimited here. (Although I reserve the right to later if I feel I want to for whatever reason.)
Just like the first is pretty damn crystal clear, however you can't use your speech to incite a riot, use the press to slander Jessie Ventura, or use your religion as a means to persecute a minority.
The second is pretty damn crystal clear. The wrangled logic, and torturing of basic English is all in a response to the simple fact that allowing people to own firearms is frightening, because humans are very imperfect, and well, have a evil strain in the population.
Right, but this response completely ignores the context in which I gave that as an example.
Good to know a direct, and objective modern day example of political theory being the driving force for change of law, rather than resting on the laurels of "law and history" is now "the feels" around here. In fact, without political philosophy being a substitute for law and history the Republicans would likely still be pimping Clinton's DOMA and trump would have crushed the rest of the GOP field by an even wider margin in the primaries.