Civil Rights Vs Originalism

Recenlty a member of Hip Hop Republican was asked these questions by
a liberal democrat.

The replies to the questions are recorded!

#1. Were the Emancipation Proclamation and the forceful desegregation of the south unconstitutional?

#2. According to originalism, we should interpret the Constitution as it was interpreted by the founding fathers. Clarence Thomas is an originalist. Had Clarence been a white SC justice in the early 19th century and someone sued on the claim that slavery was unconstitutional, how would he have ruled if he were an originalist?

#3. What's your opinion of the economic beliefs of Martin Luther King and the other black civil rights activists?

#4. Should people have the right to discriminate against black people?

#5. If there is a predominant amount of evidence that social programs, not apathy, may help to close the racial gap at the expense of higher taxes, would you support it or oppose it?


Answer

Originalism is not "the theory of original intent"

Original intent is only one theory in the Originalist family of theories. Many of the criticisms that you make are directed at Original intent and thus do not apply to Justice Thomas.

Original intent is not the same as Originalism!


Thomas also holds that the Constitution should be interpreted in light of the Declaration of Independence, notably its statement that "all men are created equal."

King's economic bill of rights called for massive government jobs programs to rebuild America's cities. He got them 40 years after
they are now hubs for gangs and crime.

Democrats have poured billons of goverment money into the city,
with little to show for it.

King was a leftist in his ecommic views, I would argue thats because the people around him were primarly leftist!

He was not hanging with Milton Friedman!

They articulated to him leftist economics, the man was a minister
not an Economist.


Should people have the right to discriminate against black people?


People will do whatever the wind leads them to do,
people who violate the constitution and bill of rights are not Americans
and should be dealt with. But yes everyone has the right to do what they want, but there are consequences to our actions.

If there is a predominant amount of evidence that social programs, not apathy, may help to close the racial gap at the expense of higher taxes, would you support it or oppose it?

No on is opposed to social programs that work, what I am opposed
to is social programs that do not, and instead hurt peoples ingenuity!
Goverment can create a nation of dependant zombies!

That to me is cruel and in it self racist!