As I always say... the left in this country hate the USA and our Constitution... now with the progression of Marxism over our country they are starting to wear it on their sleeves...
AS the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions.
Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse. Instead of arguing about what is to be done, we argue about what James Madison might have wanted done 225 years ago.
This is not to say that we should disobey all constitutional commands. Freedom of speech and religion, equal protection of the laws and protections against governmental deprivation of life, liberty or property are important, whether or not they are in the Constitution. We should continue to follow those requirements out of respect, not obligation.
__________________ All your trophy are belong to us
What's so great about the Constitution? It's nothing more than a piece of paper stating that the government has the authority to forcefully rob the people it illegitimately lords over. If that's not bad enough, the Constitution was even used as a legal justification for human chattel slavery for over 70 years in this country. As far as I'm concerned, the Constitution might as well be toilet paper.
I guess we're supposed to believe Jefferson hated the US, also?
Quote:
No sooner was the Constitution in place than our leaders began ignoring it. John Adams supported the Alien and Sedition Acts, which violated the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech. Thomas Jefferson thought every constitution should expire after a single generation. He believed the most consequential act of his presidency — the purchase of the Louisiana Territory — exceeded his constitutional powers.
There is a lot of deserved reverence to the Founding Fathers and their work. There's a lot of undue reverence to the untouchable, inflexible, divine Constitution. Both sides of the aisle have no problem changing or ignoring it on a yearly basis, let's not pretend otherwise.
I notice that on websites like Fox Nation and Glenn Beck, the headline is: "NY Times: Constitution is "Downright Evil."
I guess they assume their readers are too stupid to realize this is an op-ed piece.
The proposition that there are "evil" provisions in the US Constitution is intellectually invalid. I assume that people carrying on in such silly fashion are discussing and completely misunderstanding the 3/5ths compromise, and if they aren't talking about that, I can't even imagine hoe long the abyss has been staring back into them.
The main problem with the Constitution is that it was drawn up in a pre-industrial world. But I think its been adaptable, the only obstacle being that some people still want to read it like they are in a pre-industrial world of their own imagination and not even the 20th century.
__________________
"The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openess, honesty, understanding and feeling, are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meaness, egotism and self-interest, are the traits of success."
__________________
"The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openess, honesty, understanding and feeling, are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meaness, egotism and self-interest, are the traits of success."
Well, not really. Arguably none are living documents if by that you mean authorial intent may be disregarded. On the other hand, we know enough about these particular authors such that we can make judgements about them and thus the document they crafted.
The main problem with the Constitution is that it was drawn up in a pre-industrial world. But I think its been adaptable, the only obstacle being that some people still want to read it like they are in a pre-industrial world of their own imagination and not even the 20th century.
Industrialization is a suspicious, likely spurious grounds for discreditingthe written Constitution. It has all the adaptability it needs and has since ratification. That adaptability has been used a dozen or more times since the industrial revolution. If it belongs in the supreme law of the land, if its obviousness, legitimacy, and necessity are such, an amendment can prevail. If the sole claim that it isn't adaptable enough is that it doesn't reflect something that not enough people to get an amendment want, that is not a flaw in the Constitution, it is a flaw in the proposal.
There is a lot of deserved reverence to the Founding Fathers and their work. There's a lot of undue reverence to the untouchable, inflexible, divine Constitution. Both sides of the aisle have no problem changing or ignoring it on a yearly basis, let's not pretend otherwise.
This is absolutely correct! R and D represent two heads on the same coin. Bill is right, it's time we just uphold our core beliefs and enforce the Constitution.
__________________
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the Sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." C.S. Lewis
Let’s Give Up on the Constitution
Linear Mode
