Let's give up on the Constitution

Printable View

01-01-2013
bighead384

Let's give up on the Constitution

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/op....html?hp&_r=1&

Interesting article. I've always had thoughts like this and I'm pretty sure I agree, although I'm a bit hesitant considering so much of our law and culture stems from the Constitution. The freedoms enshrined in the constitution may be timeless, but the application of these freedom in law still need to be interpreted for modern times. I'm not saying the Constitution is worthless, but it should have any formal authority over our laws.

And I lol at this quote:

Quote:

Imagine that after careful study a government official — say, the president or one of the party leaders in Congress — reaches a considered judgment that a particular course of action is best for the country. Suddenly, someone bursts into the room with new information: a group of white propertied men who have been dead for two centuries, knew nothing of our present situation, acted illegally under existing law and thought it was fine to own slaves might have disagreed with this course of action. Is it even remotely rational that the official should change his or her mind because of this divination?
01-02-2013
RageAndLov

I have always hated the argument that if it says so in the US Constitution, it must be how we should form the society. Like the debate about gun control. If someone says guns should be banned, they will instantly hear "But 2nd Amendment! The Constitution says we must have guns!". It makes me think that perhaps the US Constitution should be changed then. Why are people treating it as if it is a holy and perfect scripture?

Just because something has been this way for a long time, it doesn't mean it should carry on being like that without any reason except that it has been like that.
01-03-2013
Harleyquiiinn

I find it interesting.

Especially when you compare to France because both our first Constitutions (and your Bill of rights and our Declaration of Human rights) have been made approximatively at the same time.

Our declaration didn't change a bit and still has a Constitutionnal value. But since 1958, we are applying our 4th Constitution, because society changed and therefore, law had to change.

I learn in my american-english law class that the American Bill of Rights, contrary to the Declaration of Human Rights wasn't written to grant rights to every American (or every Human) but simply to define what the Federal State couldn't force you to do.
Because at the time, States were afraid of the Federal Government. So basically, it is just meant to say : The Federal Government can't rule on that. And not "you have the Freedom to do this".

I guess this was ok at the time because each State was pretty independant but now, it just seems weird.
01-05-2013
bronc_28

Quote:

Originally Posted by bighead384

Interesting article. I've always had thoughts like this and I'm pretty sure I agree, although I'm a bit hesitant considering so much of our law and culture stems from the Constitution. The freedoms enshrined in the constitution may be timeless, but the application of these freedom in law still need to be interpreted for modern times. I'm not saying the Constitution is worthless, but it should have any formal authority over our laws.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harleyquiiinn

I learn in my american-english law class that the American Bill of Rights, contrary to the Declaration of Human Rights wasn't written to grant rights to every American (or every Human) but simply to define what the Federal State couldn't force you to do.
Because at the time, States were afraid of the Federal Government. So basically, it is just meant to say : The Federal Government can't rule on that. And not "you have the Freedom to do this".

Laws don't come from the constitution, it is a document meant to restrain government, Specifically limiting the role of the federal government to very little, so much so that, they saw it necessary to say that congress must meet at least once a year. All other powers were reserved for the states. The bill of rights was to say, no matter what, neither the states nor the federal government could do these.

So in short, I am not for giving up on the principles that protect us from government. Call me crazy.