Politics

10177 readers

13 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Opinion | Antonin Scalia was wrong about the meaning of ‘bear arms’ (www.washingtonpost.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Gaywallet to c/politics

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Gaywallet 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Look I hate the guy plenty, too, but this isn't exactly solid ground to start a discussion with. The article provides plenty of ground to talk about linguistics or at the very least not just hate on him. I think it's important to point out that he was not just a deplorable person, but that the very reasoning he used to argue in favor of his points was not based in reality.

[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Agreed, sorry, it was just the format of the title made me want to format my personal opinion on him as well.

That's just, like, your opinion, man.

Also, just to point out:

but that the very reasoning he used to argue in favor of his points was not based in reality.

who ignored reality to legislate his twisted vision from the bench

I feel like I covered that.