I think you have to emphasize in many of these cases the last two, purpose and consequence, and I think there are ways of doing that which are honest writing down what you're doing never having a secret or hidden motive.

the problem with purpose and consequence is that they they invite subjective judgment uh to decide the purpose of a of a statute it depends at what level of generality you look at it

the constitution in the application of it adapts to the circumstance stand in order to keep the values the same

if all if all you meant by the living Constitution is that the constitution has to be applied to new circumstances that were not envisioned at the time of its adoption I wouldn't give it the name living Constitution but I wouldn't disagree

it's very undemocratic for the court to say make the change it's quite possible for the people to abolish the death penalty to Pro permit homosexual conduct or for that matter same-sex marriage and and to and to permit suicide and all sorts of things