The perils of Judge Barrett's "originalism"

In this free, one hour teach-in, hosted by The Commons SF, we'll explore the internal contradictions peculiar to Amy Barrett's faith and commitment to taking the US Constitution in the word sense of its writers. Both Barrett and her mentor, Scalia, require Constitutional Amendments to liberate individuals and government from what they consider to be the very restrictive language of the 1789 document.

This is really a replay of the Scopes Trial, we argue. For a person who takes the Biblical Commandments as divine enunciations of morality and law, an originalist must accept that women are property according to their god, and that only human addenda can improve on god's plan for endorsing employment bondage and gender preference.

In the absence of passage of the Equal Rights Amendment, women must be construed, at least in many circumstances, to be second class citizens by an originalist. Scalia so declared in the 1996 Virginia Military Institute female admissions case.