Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It gives me pleasure to note that I live within a walking distance where this great document - the Constitution of the United States - was conceived, discussed, debated, written, ratified, and signed. It was indeed one of the triumphs of the founding fathers.
snip....
Quite frankly the opinions and ideas that are sometimes expressed here on these threads in C-D are so juvenile, naive, unscholarly, and unabashedly partisan that it is best not to dignify them with a refutation.
Kind of reminds you of the Supreme Court Decisions over the years does it not?
Wrong! Show me in any of the founders writings that it was intended to be a "living document!" That is a "progressive" idea that is nowhere found in any writings of the founders. It originated many years after the Constitution was written.
The amendment process is the means by which we change the Constitution. Not by reinterpretation based on some "new" ideas about the nature of man, and a rejection of natural law and inalienable rights, as "progressives" believe.
"The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution, which at any time exists, ‘till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. … If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed". — George Washington
Whatever it might be, the Constitution is NOT vague. Terms like "shall not be infringed", "Shall not be violated", and "shall make no law" were very specific and very clear in limiting the government from overstepping its bounds. Such phrases were intended as everlasting chains on the government, placing the rights of the people well beyond its reach. The Founders never intended for the Constitution to be "carefully interpreted", they wrote it so that and schoolboy of that time could read and understand it. It is telling that supposedly intelligent people today have trouble understanding it. As has already been stated, it means exactly what it says, and anyone now or in the past, who feels the need to interpret it in a manner other than which it was written, is simply unwilling to abide by the principles contained therein.
Anyone's personal interpretation of the Constitution is irrelevant. Supreme Court members disagree, themselves. That's how democracy works. If there's something you don't agree with, sue in federal court.
The United States of America is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,556 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
Written very straight forward, right after fighting a blood war over tyranny and oppression.
Individual freedom as outlined in the bill of rights has been compromised. Not because We The People let it happen, but because We The People directed it to happen. No amendment. Just feel good law and alphabet agencies mandating we no longer have that freedom.
Not every unconstitutional law is challenged to the courts.
Umm, the Bill of Rights are amendments. So are the other 17 amendments.
And the Consitution wasnt written until 4 years after the last shot was fired, technically about 8 years after the last official shot.
Whatever it might be, the Constitution is NOT vague. Terms like "shall not be infringed", "Shall not be violated", and "shall make no law" were very specific and very clear in limiting the government from overstepping its bounds. Such phrases were intended as everlasting chains on the government, placing the rights of the people well beyond its reach. The Founders never intended for the Constitution to be "carefully interpreted", they wrote it so that and schoolboy of that time could read and understand it. It is telling that supposedly intelligent people today have trouble understanding it. As has already been stated, it means exactly what it says, and anyone now or in the past, who feels the need to interpret it in a manner other than which it was written, is simply unwilling to abide by the principles contained therein.
We are not discussing what might happen. We are discussing what has happened. And if you were actually right you could prevail by simply adding a little clarification. "shall make no law" means none not for any class or kid of citizen. None. It can be done.
But you do not have the votes to do it. So it means what the USSC says it means.
Read Korematsu and figure out how they got there. And then you begin to understand the actual problem.
The United States of America is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic.
I picked this up somewhere along the way. Always thought it was about the best answer...
The most thorough answer comes from selections of the Federalist Papers: an Extended Limited Commercial Federal Democratic Republic.
A little something there for everybody.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
