i agree.The interesting thing about Article I is that nowhere(?) in there when our founding fathers were discussing currency did they use any word but "coin."
Later, in Article I, Section 8 they go on to say that, "To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States."
I don't know legally what they are referring to when they use the word "securities." If securities does refer to currency then I am in error above.
In Article I, Section 10 "No state shall...coin money... ...make anything but gold or silver coin a payment a tender in payment of debts..."
But on a broader note the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights provides that "Congress shall make no law...abridging...the press..."
What do they mean with "press?" Clearly at that time there was no conceivable notion of a radio host, or television, or internet. Yet we liberals today don't attack the protection of reporters working for radio, television, or the internet.
I guess to my thinking I want the Constitution interpreted very liberally when it comes to protecting our rights and very conservatively when it comes to government power and its budget. To my limited understanding that was the overarching "original intent" of the Constitution - to protect our liberty and put a tight leash on governmental power.
Contrary to Justice Jackson, I DO believe the Constitution is a suicide pact, in a way. It lists those values that we are willing to kill for, and also to die for. For if we are not willing to die for our rights and freedoms then we default to allowing the fear of loss of life to always override our freedoms. I far prefer Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death." Clearly Justice Jackson didn't align himself with Mr. Henry's values.
Regards,
Doug
too many people in government today and informed citizens are willing to compromise. There is NO room for compromise on certain issues. none.