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.
Rights aren't granted by the Constitution. Rights already exist, and existed LONG before the U.S. was founded. Therefore, the Constitution is a moot point.
Rights aren't granted by the Constitution. Rights already exist, and existed LONG before the U.S. was founded. Therefore, the Constitution is a moot point.
Not exactly, but close.
You are correct that our natural God given rights were and have always been there.
The beauty of our Constitution is that it specified not what our rights are, but more importantly specifically prohibits our government from attempting to take them away.
Thus it is far from moot, as a tyrannical government through coercion and/or unmitigated power could otherwise attempt to strip of us them.
Any time the Constitution opposes the national interests, it is ignored or reinterpreted. Our government doesn't actually follow the Constitution, and it never has.
The Constitution isn't a shield that protects the people from either democracy or the ruling classes. It is a tool used by the ruling classes to protect them from the people.
The ruling classes only use the Constitution to block the will of the people when it doesn't coincide with their interests. If the ruling classes and the will of the people align, no piece of paper can stop them.
So who gives a **** about the Constitution? Only children and the ignorant believe it even exists. It is like the tooth-fairy and Santa Clause.
"Whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it." - Lysander Spooner
I think we should get rid of the entire Constitution and make another one. However, I only trust a handful of people in our current government to make one that's not totally self-serving. We're completely f***ed as a country.
I think we should get rid of the entire Constitution and make another one. However, I only trust a handful of people in our current government to make one that's not totally self-serving. We're completely f***ed as a country.
It wouldn't do much good. Constitution or not, the United States will function in such as way as it serves our national interests.
Most "Western" countries either have no Constitution at all, or have a Constitution radically different than ours. And yet, other than small differences, every one of those countries have pretty much the same policies, institutions, and laws.
Even where the United States isn't quite there yet, we are heading there. And no sane and rational man can't see it.
These institutions are so ubiquitous for exactly one reason, because it works. And in this world, the only measure if something is functioning well or not, is money(IE economic-growth).
You naive simpletons seem to be incapable of understanding something which should be obvious. The Constitution doesn't exist to stop the "will of the elites"(IE the business-interests, who always get what they want), it is there to stop the "will of the people". It is to make sure democracy doesn't get in the way of the national-interests.
Without the Constitution, either the elites would have to find new tools to protect and further their interests, or this country would fall apart.
And regardless of all the mythology surrounding the Constitution, that is what it has always been. The majority of the founding-fathers didn't really care about rights, or equality, or democracy. There were no equal rights in 18th-century America. The Constitutional protections did not cover all men. And only a handful of wealthy men were even allowed to vote.
The Constitution was there, not to protect the people from each other, or to protect the people from the elites, but to protect the rich from the people. That is its only purpose.
It wouldn't do much good. Constitution or not, the United States will function in such as way as it serves our national interests.
Most "Western" countries either have no Constitution at all, or have a Constitution radically different than ours. And yet, other than small differences, every one of those countries have pretty much the same policies, institutions, and laws.
Even where the United States isn't quite there yet, we are heading there. And no sane and rational man can't see it.
These institutions are so ubiquitous for exactly one reason, because it works. And in this world, the only measure if something is functioning well or not, is money(IE economic-growth).
You naive simpletons seem to be incapable of understanding something which should be obvious. The Constitution doesn't exist to stop the "will of the elites"(IE the business-interests, who always get what they want), it is there to stop the "will of the people". It is to make sure democracy doesn't get in the way of the national-interests.
Without the Constitution, either the elites would have to find new tools to protect and further their interests, or this country would fall apart.
And regardless of all the mythology surrounding the Constitution, that is what it has always been. The majority of the founding-fathers didn't really care about rights, or equality, or democracy. There were no equal rights in 18th-century America. The Constitutional protections did not cover all men. And only a handful of wealthy men were even allowed to vote.
The Constitution was there, not to protect the people from each other, or to protect the people from the elites, but to protect the rich from the people. That is its only purpose.
In the present day, the Paulbots are at the beck & call of the libertarian business worshipping elites, like the Mercers & the Koch families, they use whatever tools available, including the Constitution, to carry out their agenda.
Quote:
Consider the Lawrence case decided by the Supreme Court in June. The Court determined that Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protected under the 14th amendment “right to privacy.” Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution. There are, however, states’ rights — rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards. But rather than applying the real Constitution and declining jurisdiction over a properly state matter, the Court decided to apply the imaginary Constitution and impose its vision on the people of Texas.
14th- birthright citizenship to illegal alien babies. This was not the original intention of the amendment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by G1..
2nd, the founding fathers never intended it to be used like it is.The never knew or could foresee of the weaponry that has been created.
These two. Both for the exact same reasoning as both posters beautifully illustrated.
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.
