Quote:
Originally posted by jerseydevi1:
Quote:
Originally posted by pnwbeers:
[b]
Quote:
Originally posted by jerseydevi1:
[b]Interpret the constitution like you are supposed to, and stop making laws.
How do you think it should be interpreted?[/b]
I don't know, I'm not a supreme court justice. It has been may years since my last real class on this, but my memory says that they are supposed to judge based on the constitution as written, not create laws through judgements because of thier own beliefs.[/b]
Judges aren't supposed to create laws based on their own beliefs, and by in large they don't (they can't, quite frankly). The constitution wasn't ever intended to be read literally - it's a constitution, not a statute. The framer's intentionally created a document that could be organic and change with time.

It doesn't say anything about electronic surveillance devices that can see thru walls (stuff like thermal imaging), but the constitution has been intepreted to prevent abuse of those devices.

I admit that substantive due process is quite an intellectual leap, but the equal protection clause in this context (gay marriage) is not.