Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
How are we supposed to know about your personal Constitution?
How are we supposed to know about your personal Constitution?
Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official
There you go. So, what part do you not understand?
How are we supposed to know about your personal Constitution?
Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official
There you go. So, what part do you not understand?
That one isn't yours, it's the founding fathers.
Thief.
If you think a part of the constitution is vague, post it here and I will explain to you what it means while backing it up with federalist papers and/or Madison papers. It is written in plain English and does not need interpretations, so I will help you understand if you have any queries. You are welcome.
If you think a part of the constitution is vague, post it here and I will explain to you what it means while backing it up with federalist papers and/or Madison papers. It is written in plain English and does not need interpretations, so I will help you understand if you have any queries. You are welcome.
Doesn't "Provide For The Common Good" in the Constitution mean that healthcare is a right and that subjects, er, citizens should be forced to pay for it?
Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States," amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction.
Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases. A power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of descents, or the forms of conveyances, must be very singularly expressed by the terms "to raise money for the general welfare."
But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon? If the different parts of the same instrument ought to be so expounded, as to give meaning to every part which will bear it, shall one part of the same sentence be excluded altogether from a share in the meaning; and shall the more doubtful and indefinite terms be retained in their full extent, and the clear and precise expressions be denied any signification whatsoever? For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity, which, as we are reduced to the dilemma of charging either on the authors of the objection or on the authors of the Constitution, we must take the liberty of supposing, had not its origin with the latter.
The objection here is the more extraordinary, as it appears that the language used by the convention is a copy from the articles of Confederation. The objects of the Union among the States, as described in article third, are "their common defense, security of their liberties, and mutual and general welfare." The terms of article eighth are still more identical: "All charges of war and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defense or general welfare, and allowed by the United States in Congress, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury," etc. A similar language again occurs in article ninth. Construe either of these articles by the rules which would justify the construction put on the new Constitution, and they vest in the existing Congress a power to legislate in all cases whatsoever. But what would have been thought of that assembly, if, attaching themselves to these general expressions, and disregarding the specifications which ascertain and limit their import, they had exercised an unlimited power of providing for the common defense and general welfare? I appeal to the objectors themselves, whether they would in that case have employed the same reasoning in justification of Congress as they now make use of against the convention. How difficult it is for error to escape its own condemnation!
I can tell by reading your original post that you know nothing about the Constitution. Carry on.
Seeing as how one of us has actually been paid for writing about the Constitution and published on the subject (not you), I'll just have to laugh at that.
Shitforbrains, take your crappy words out of my mouth. Thank you.
You're RETARDED if you think that a plain reading of the Constitution is all that's necessary to understand it. There are constitutional doctrines and case law that have grown up around the document that are counter-intuitive and nowhere near a lay understanding of the thing.
Thanks for proving me right that you don't understand this glorious work.
I have a question, under provision 8 concerning the powers given to the United States Congress "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measure", when was the last time congress exercised that power?
