Thought of a test for how much weight to give the in-order-to-provide for-a-militia part of the 2nd amendment: What if there were a part of the Constitution that included a statement of purpose that said it derived from something we now see to be factually incorrect, would that affect the prescriptive statement to which it was attached? What if there were something like this: "Tobacco being an especially healthful substance, Congress shall make no law abridging the right to produce, sell, or use it." Since we can see that the reason cited is based on a provable untruth, does that invalidate or modify the prescription to which it is attached? Or do we go with the prescription no matter the validity, or lack thereof, of the reason given for it? Would it make a difference if the reason were in the record of the framers' debate rather than in the text of the Constitution itself?