Smoove B asked:
I’ve been hearing that since law school. How the Constitution has to be “interpreted” to cover scenarios which could not have been contemplated by the Founders. Like gay marriage, or abortion. Guess what, abortion dates to at least second-century Greece, homosexuality to 600 BC China. These things were not unknown to the Founders. I find it very telling gay marriage and abortion rights are nowhere mentioned in the Bill of Rights, and that the Second Amendment (#2 on the list) is under constant attack. Your thoughts?
Well, the Dems try to stomp the life out of it. So, it might seem to be living.
The only interpretation Dems want is for the Constitution to follow the Dems’ dictates.
Comment by How Big is Your Govt Check — October 7, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
no it is set in stone.
Comment by ken s — October 10, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
It is the document by which this country was founded upon and any politician who wants to break its rules or do away with any of its promised rights should be thrown in jail quite frankly.
Comment by Live Free Or Die — October 11, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
The founding father had the expectation that the nation would reconvene a Constitutional Convention every now and again to adjust our system of government to reflect changing times. They would likely be horrified to discover that we’re trying to use a 230 year old Constitution to govern this country. Under the circumstances, since we lack the will or the courage or whatever to fix the Constitution so it takes modern understanding into consideration, we have no choice but to treat it as a living document.
Lots of things weren’t mentioned in the Constitution. Right to privacy? No. Right to travel? No. Freedom to marry someone of a different race? No. It goes on and on. You wouldn’t want to live in a country where the only rights we were guaranteed were those specifically delineated in the Constitution. And after all, we’re supposed to live in a country where the government’s rights are *limited* by the Constitution. Not where rights are granted to us by it. But you’ve gone to law school, so you should know that, right?
Comment by Adam B — October 13, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
The Constitution is deader than my ex in bed. It neither lives, nor breathes. Given that the means of alteration are contained within, there is never any reason for it to be overruled. And after each Amendment, it goes back to being dead.
It has, in fact, been Amended, Constitutionally, 27 times, as recently as 1992. So it is NOT 230 years old. In it’s current form it is only 26 years old and reflects the majority view of the citizenry.
Sadly, people use this “living, breathing” crap to justify overturning it by fiat.
If any of those liberal agenda items had real public support, they could simply amend the Constitution to provide for those things. But they know they are a minority, so they get judges to make stuff up, and wipe their a..es with the Constitution.
Comment by Dave Holman — October 14, 2007 @ 12:24 pm
Homosexuality is traced back farther. It was the major sin of Sodom & Gomorrah, several thousands of years ago.
The Founding Fathers were very specific about the rights enumerated, not only in the Constitution, but the Bill of Rights. They made it very clear that these rights are derived from the God of the Holy Bible. They made it clear that they were merely putting onto paper, and into the fabric of our country, what was already there. They did not address homosexuality or abortion because it never occurred to them that anyone would actually try to claim these as “rights”.
To truly understand our founding documents, and the founders intentions, you must go back and read what the Founding Fathers said.
The 2nd amendment is under attack for a specific reason. The Founding Fathers put that in there because they knew that, if the people carried arms, the government could not run roughshod over them. Ergo, those who think that the government should be in charge of every part of our lives, insist on restricting the 2nd amendment, thus limiting our ability to stand against such governmental tyranny.
Comment by †Lawrence R† — October 14, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
You see here what the problem is. People feel that the Constitution spells out everything. It does not, but it dost spell out what is necessary. The Bill of Rights is a listing of ten important issues the people had at the time. But it acknowledged that our rights did not come from the government, they came from our “God”, “Creator”, “Right of being”, how ever you want to describe it. The People of that time knew that there was no way they could enumerate all the rights that man had, so they gave 10 examples, if you will, of the pressing issues at the time.
The Constitution is not living.
And some people would have you believe that it is a limitation on the people, which it is not.
It is a limitation for the Government. Look at how things are expressed
“The Government shall not”.
The framers even came up with a way to alter the constitution, if the people felt it was necessary, which has been done 17 times since the Bill of Rights was adopted.
And to top it all off, everybody seems to forget about a very important amendment;
10 – The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Thomas Jefferson even stated
“The States should be left to do whatever they can do as well as the federal government”
Give the power back to the people, Allow states to be sovereign and limit the power of the Federal Government.
Pretty much set in stone….
Comment by Charles M — October 15, 2007 @ 3:05 am
I think it has more to do with the culture of the times.
It was by our standards, very socially 18th Century (since it was the 18th Century).
Influenced by Christian fundamentalists leaving Europe to America…. Homosexuality and abortions were so frowned upon culturally I think no one really gave it much thought back then.
Cultures and times change, so now they are given thought to, while back then they weren’t
Comment by Mathew H — October 18, 2007 @ 11:14 am