All Things Constitutional: discuss the U.S. Constitution (house of representatives, revolution, brainwash)

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by Pandamonium

Ovcotto, these individuals would have a lot less of a fall if they were not placed on such pedestals to begin with.

Well I don't know if it was that rancorous but your point is well made. If you read Richard Beeman's "Plain Honest Men" you will immediately come to the conclusion that the Constitutional Convention wasn't all that much different from today's Congress, although the debate was held at far higher level, with plenty of backroom deals, buying and selling of votes and political machinations particularly over the issue of representation and make up of the Congress.

[hilgi]

Originally Posted by dusk99

I think some people in the United States are obsessed with the Constitution and don't realize it was written over 200 years ago.

So? Keeping the force of authoritarians in check doesn't need to go away just because it is old. For thousands of years the masses were controlled by the elite, and then along came the constitution. I only wish the current elite would abide by it.

[tvdxer]

Question:

Does the U.S. constitution include a provision (implicit or explicit) allowing its abrogation or replacement with another constitution in the future? Or is it meant to be "eternal"?

[Nevar242]

Some very good posts and comments on this subject.
But think
With out the SECOND the rest are meaningless.

[hilgi]

Originally Posted by tvdxer

Question:

Does the U.S. constitution include a provision (implicit or explicit) allowing its abrogation or replacement with another constitution in the future? Or is it meant to be "eternal"?

I don't see how individual rights cannot be eternal? That is the idea of the constitution, something permanent on behalf of the minority against the dictatorship of the majority.

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by hilgi

I don't see how individual rights cannot be eternal? That is the idea of the constitution, something permanent on behalf of the minority against the dictatorship of the majority.

What man giveth, man can take away. We are discussing the Constitution not some holy writ. The Constitution provides a mechanism for its own amendment thus any amendment is possible including the retraction of the Bill of Rights.

[hilgi]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

What man giveth, man can take away. We are discussing the Constitution not some holy writ. The Constitution provides a mechanism for its own amendment thus any amendment is possible including the retraction of the Bill of Rights.

If individual rights are not permanent then what good is a constitution? The idea to to protect us against the tyranny of the majority, if you are right then the majority can decide to remove our rights and control the minority.

Again, then why even bother with a constitution?

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by hilgi

If individual rights are not permanent then what good is a constitution? The idea to to protect us against the tyranny of the majority, if you are right then the majority can decide to remove our rights and control the minority.

Again, then why even bother with a constitution?

Again, (a word that I am getting tired of using) the Constitution is a man made political document, a rule for governance, it isn't a holy scrit. The Constitution does not possess any special powers other than those derived by the consent of the people to be governed by it. If in the event it loses that consent it will be relegated to nothing more than a historical document.

[hilgi]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

Again, (a word that I am getting tired of using) the Constitution is a man made political document, a rule for governance, it isn't a holy scrit. The Constitution does not possess any special powers other than those derived by the consent of the people to be governed by it. If in the event it loses that consent it will be relegated to nothing more than a historical document.

It is a man made contract between individuals and the government protecting the individuals. What good is a contract if it can be eliminated by the majority? You are saying that the minority does not have any rights because at any time they can be taken away by the majority.

[dusk99]

Originally Posted by hilgi

It is a man made contract between individuals and the government protecting the individuals. What good is a contract if it can be eliminated by the majority? You are saying that the minority does not have any rights because at any time they can be taken away by the majority.

The founders owned slaves.