Do you know what Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson thought of the beloved Constitution? Do you also comprehend what a strict adherence to the original constitution would entail? I don't think you do.
This document MUST be amended and HAS been amended to fit the ever-shifting paradigms as time progressed. It's in NO way a static document - rather, it's in a state of flux. The people who take umbrage under this document ultimately dictate it - a simple ontological fact. It has changed and will forever change. No ideology or amount of will can stop this force. Savvy?
Johnny: you may very well be right - the whole constitution may not possess a single mention of the word democracy, but representational government is made CLEAR all throughout. We can engage in a discussion of semantics, but I think we all understand the point I'm making. In this country, majority rules. And unfortunately, might is sometimes right, according to American history. In the eternal words of Jim Morrison, 'they got the guns, but......we got the numbers!"
No 'very well may be' to it. I
am correct.
We may disagree, but
I believe the Constitution was specifically crafted to protect the rights of the individual
from government. If the mob controls government, the Constitution is the buffer between the rights of the individual and the fickle nature of mob rule. The framers knew this, too; which is why they did not include the "D" word anywhere on the document.
And you are quite correct about the current state of affairs in the U.S. The Constitution has been ignored, bloodied, and bruised; especially over the previous century. Special mention in this category goes to Woodrow Wilson, but most especially to
Fascist
Dictator Roosevelt.
Consider for a moment why there are only twenty-seven amendments. Why is that? Because it
should be difficult to amend the Constitution.
The amendment process prevents the Constitution from becoming an 'antiquated document.'
Were there portions of the Constitution which deserved amending? Without question.
Do there exist current portions of the document which merit amending due to these ever-shifting paradigms? Time will tell.
Please refrain from bolding words - I'm fully capable of comprehending common emphasis structures in english syntax. If written properly, writing as you write is completely redundant - insinuating at best.
Thanks for the critique. As it was
free, I will take it for what it's worth.
To put a finer point on it: These are
my posts, not yours. I'll do it
my way, not yours.
Know your audience.
As with all things Liberal....in the end, the poor suffer with all those good intentions.