- Joined
- Sep 9, 2011
- Messages
- 13,745
- Reaction score
- 8,546
- Location
- North 38°28′ West 121°26′
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
actually his point is sound. Catawba argues that infringements are OK as long as the infringements did not prevent all from excercising a right
Exactly.
It's a variant of the argument that we've seen from other members of the far wrong, who assert that as long as some exercise of a right is allowed, that the right is not being violated when other exercises of it are not allowed. In this case, as long as there are some people who are allowed to vote, or to own a gun, the argument is there is no violation in selectively denying some other people the right to do so. This is solid digestive waste from a male bovine, of course, but then that's really what defines the far wrong.