The U.S. Constitution

[HumanityisSaved]

Do you believe that U.S. Citizens, Elected officials, and the functioning of the U.S. Govt. should abide by the U.S. Constitution?

[sandie]

Surely this is not an option? :confused:

[Jason]

Surely this is not an option? :confused:

Surely what isn't an option?

[sandie]

Abiding by the US Constitution, as stated in the title.

In democracies, constitutions are legal frameworks by which governments can work. If a constitution is to be changed, it is changed though a vote by the adult citizens of that country. For example, in Australia, there have been few changes made to the Australian Constitution, because the reforms have not had the required majority at the ballot box.

[Jason]

Abiding by the US Constitution, as stated in the title.

In democracies, constitutions are legal frameworks by which governments can work. If a constitution is to be changed, it is changed though a vote by the adult citizens of that country. For example, in Australia, there have been few changes made to the Australian Constitution, because the reforms have not had the required majority at the ballot box.

Are you trying to say, "I didn't know not abiding by the Constitution was possible"?

[sandie]

Yes, Jason. The US Government must abide by the US Constitution. (Modals are important, by the way.) :P

[Jason]

Yes, Jason. The US Government must abide by the US Constitution. (Modals are important, by the way.) :P

Well, it should but it often doesn't. That's one reason why we have the Supreme Court ... to make sure laws abide by the Constitution.

[sandie]

We have similar courts here with the same function.

[HumanityisSaved]

There are so many things done in the US that are contrary to the Constitution its pathetic. I have two close relatives that are lawyers and one is a Constitutional expert and they are appauled at where we are when it is compared to the Constitution. One example is the Federal Department of Education- UnConstitutional!

[RevZeek]

Many things that the Federal government has done and is doing are blatantly unconstitutional. The sad part of it is that the people don't know enough to protest or more likely, simply don't care. Apathy (in my opinion of course) is probably the number one issue facing any free society.

[HumanityisSaved]

Many things that the Federal government has done and is doing are blatantly unconstitutional. The sad part of it is that the people don't know enough to protest or more likely, simply don't care. Apathy (in my opinion of course) is probably the number one issue facing any free society.

I agree and it is within the nestled comfort of wealth and prosperity that apathy breeds best. Perhaps in this time of uncertainty Americans will again demand responsibility from their Federal Government.

[Aussie3rddayfan]

Do you believe that U.S. Citizens, Elected officials, and the functioning of the U.S. Govt. should abide by the U.S. Constitution?

Um...yes. Why should it even be considered? Of course they should abibe by it.

[HumanityisSaved]

Um...yes. Why should it even be considered? Of course they should abibe by it.

They should but don't. The Federal Department of Education is unConstitutional, so is the Federal Department of health and Human Services, and the list goes on and on.

If the US Federal Govt. were taken back to its Constitutionally mandated size we could eliminate the Federal Income Tax and replace it with NOTHING!

[danbos]

They should but don't. The Federal Department of Education is unConstitutional, so is the Federal Department of health and Human Services, and the list goes on and on.

If the US Federal Govt. were taken back to its Constitutionally mandated size we could eliminate the Federal Income Tax and replace it with NOTHING!

I'm guessing you also wrote in Ron Paul? :D

[HumanityisSaved]

I'm guessing you also wrote in Ron Paul? :D

you bet I did!

[HotWireD]

The sad part of it is that the people don't know enough to protest or more likely, simply don't care. Apathy (in my opinion of course) is probably the number one issue facing any free society.

In my opinion too.

[phil_ur_friend]

Do you believe that U.S. Citizens, Elected officials, and the functioning of the U.S. Govt. should abide by the U.S. Constitution?

How about the "Bill of Rights"? :rolleyes:

Right to Bear Arms? ....right...

Here we go folks!

Time to let the Hussein/Clinton combo come in and systematically dismantle the very foundation of this country.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights is unfortunately more smoke and mirrors these days (IMO).


Phil, your friend

:D He's got the whole world... in His hands...;)

[Jason]

No need to differentiate. The Bill of Rights, because they are amendments, are now part of the Constitution.

[mcgreen311]

I'm gonna ask a controversial question just for giggles. What are your thoughts on scrapping the constitution and starting over?

As the demographics of this nation change, is this particular social contract still relevant?

[phil_ur_friend]

If we did...it wouldn't include God, I'd be willing to bet on that.

Phil, your friend

[mcgreen311]

If we did...it wouldn't include God, I'd be willing to bet on that.

Phil, your friend

It already doesn't, so I'll take your bet.

Edit: I guess I wouldn't take your bet then.

[HumanityisSaved]

I'm gonna ask a controversial question just for giggles. What are your thoughts on scrapping the constitution and starting over?

As the demographics of this nation change, is this particular social contract still relevant?

NO There is a process the Founding Fathers put in place to change the Constitution. It is difficult to do because of the severity of tampering with the Constitution.
Some are already suggesting another Constitutional Convention to do just that. A pox on any effort to do so.

*not giggling*:)

[mcgreen311]

NO There is a process the Founding Fathers put in place to change the Constitution. It is difficult to do because of the severity of tampering with the Constitution.
Some are already suggesting another Constitutional Convention to do just that. A pox on any effort to do so.

*not giggling*:)

I didn't know what to think about the the smiley face combined with "not giggling". :) Anyway...

For the sake of discussion, why should what the founders said 200+ years ago carry the same weight now?

[HumanityisSaved]

I didn't know what to think about the the smiley face combined with "not giggling". :) Anyway...

For the sake of discussion, why should what the founders said 200+ years ago carry the same weight now?

Because the Constitution is comprised of timeless principles not just culturally relevant ideas. Plain and simple.

[HumanityisSaved]

I didn't know what to think about the the smiley face combined with "not giggling". :) Anyway...

For the sake of discussion, why should what the founders said 200+ years ago carry the same weight now?

Because the Constitution is comprised of timeless principles not just culturally relevant ideas. Plain and simple.

hello? anyone out there? Mcgreen? What happened to our discussion?

[Jason]

I'm gonna ask a controversial question just for giggles. What are your thoughts on scrapping the constitution and starting over?

As the demographics of this nation change, is this particular social contract still relevant?

No need to start over. Amend it. And yeah they made it difficult for a reason. If the demographics change drastically enough then votes for certain possible amendments will reflect that. That's why you, a woman, can vote now.

[mcgreen311]

hello? anyone out there? Mcgreen? What happened to our discussion?

Still here. I was playing Devil's advocate mostly, and decided to ruminate a bit.

I don't know if I would say that the entire consitution is made up of "timeless" principles. I would say that the content is certainly well informed in the context of problems with monarchy and tyranny. However, I do not think that the contents laid out are the only way that a country can be run. Some things certainly are culturally dependent. If not, there would be no need for amendments.

Most of us agree with the culture* (us "freedom-loving" democracy/republic inclined peeps), but I wouldn't rule out the possibility for the culture to completely change, thus necessitating a new constitution. Likely? No. Possible? Minutely.

The constitution is essentially a societal contract, and societal demographics have changed significantly since it was created. As a nation, we tend to look at things on a majority basis. Is that relevant today? As culture shifts, will there be a loss of a clear majority, and what would happen then?

How's that for now?:)

*At least with the amendments included.

[mcgreen311]

That's why you, a woman, can vote now.

I'm really trying to come up with a snappy, sarcastic response to that, but I can't think of anything. Darn!

ETA: Oh, I finally voted. I think we should abide by the constitution as written. If changes need to be made, then they should be in writing first. I think the problem lies in the interpretation. There are blatant abuses, sure, but I think the philosophical difference of strict vs. loose construction are what causes most problems.(That's my historian/records keeper response, and just MHO).

[Evanescence]

LOL..I loved the last option...

[mcgreen311]

hello? anyone out there? Mcgreen? What happened to our discussion?

Now it's my turn. Hello? Anyone there? Is this thing on?;)

[HumanityisSaved]

Many things that the Federal government has done and is doing are blatantly unconstitutional. The sad part of it is that the people don't know enough to protest or more likely, simply don't care. Apathy (in my opinion of course) is probably the number one issue facing any free society.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light or transient causes; accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
-The Declaration of Independance July 4, 1776

Thomas Jefferson agrees!