Living Document or Not?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by immto, Aug 1, 2010.

  1. immto
    Offline

    immto Return to Freedom

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    278
    Thanks Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Danville, IL
    Ratings:
    +52
    The Constitution of the United Stated of America is the document that organizes our system of government and secures our rights as citizens of this great Nation. You might have heard or read in recent time that this document is a “Living Document”. You might even recall that Al Gore made this point in 2000 during the presidential campaign. You may also be aware that Barrack Obama supports this concept as he wrote in his book, “The Audacity of Hope”. Many others also support this idea and have written about it over the years but does that make it a reality?

    Progressives believe this wholeheartedly as it was they who originally started this concept, going back to Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson as well their Supreme Court Justices Louise Brandeis and Oliver Wendell Holmes. They created the idea that instead of referring to the actual document we could refer to our own case law and their decisions in future matters. They believed they knew better than the founding fathers. These very same progressives were those who supported eugenics’ and it’s use it to eliminate the black race. These initiatives where hidden in plain sight mixed with more tame ideals such reductions in corruption and improvements to government efficiency.

    Ask yourself if our Constitution was intended to be a “Living” Constitution why is that we never heard of witnessed those words until 1937 when Prof. Howard McBain wrote a book with that title. No earlier record shows any reference to this and you certainly will not find this mentioned by any of our founding fathers but our education system teaches this as a guiding principle to our youth. There is no shortage of this concept anywhere you look so to the undiscerning eye this seems like a logical and sound rationale. You will read books and articles by classically trained Authors and journalist referring to this concept like it’s understood fact without regard to the original source documents.

    Now the Progressives of the early 20th Century did bring us some key ideas that I will not attempt to challenge here although each can be in great length. They did bring us Child Labors laws and the idea of “Trust Busting” as well as Prohibition. OK, maybe Prohibition didn’t work out so well, but I digress. They also supported Conservationism and Reclamation as well as Union Labor. Even though they are responsible for these changes does not make it right for them to change the entire foundation of our Government. Let us not overlook or dismiss the thoughts and words of those who designed this great nation.

    In Federalist 45, ”the powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite”. The Constitution from its very origin was the frame of a national government made up of special and enumerated powers, and not of general and unlimited powers. Thomas Jefferson said it best, “Let no more be heard of trust in men, but bind them down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” And possibly the most powerful of his arguments, “On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

    Do our leaders follow this guideline today? You be the judge.

    Cheers.
     
  2. bigrebnc1775
    Offline

    bigrebnc1775 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    64,004
    Thanks Received:
    3,798
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Location:
    Kannapolis, N.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,830
    The Constitution can be changed but there is a process that must be followed. and approved by the majority of Americans. Not the majority in congress.
     
  3. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,518
    Thanks Received:
    5,898
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,928
    It is not a mutable document. It means what it says, thus the included means to AMEND it via amendments.

    If the left does not like what it says..... make an amendment and get it past the People. That's how it works.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  4. Greenbeard
    Offline

    Greenbeard Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,809
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +1,323
    Out of curiosity, do you believe early leaders followed that guideline? Did Washington when he chartered the first national bank? Or Jefferson when he made the Louisiana purchase or embargoed all "Ships and Vessels in the Ports and Harbours of the United States"? Or Madison when he renewed the charter on the national bank?
     
  5. Tech_Esq
    Offline

    Tech_Esq Sic Semper Tyrannis!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,408
    Thanks Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Ratings:
    +558
    Two things are readily apparent when considering this question:

    1. The Constitution was never intended to be "a living, breathing" document. Why? It was written by, until just prior to its writing, English subjects. The English constitution is living and breathing and unwritten. If these English subject had wanted to create a "living" constitution, they knew how to do it and were steeped in that tradition. Instead, they wrote a definite document and described a system of governance within the four corners of that document.

    2. Despite the apparent clarity of number one, the justices of the Supreme Court became so intensely politically corrupted that in 1941, when they decided the U.S. v. Darby Lumber Co. they had the temerity to pronounce one the amendments to the Bill of Rights a mere "truism" (namely the 10th Amendment). This pronouncement unleashed the Federal Government from its last fetter and practically ensured that the states had little or no standing to fight against the skyrocketing power of the Federal Government. When combined with the Wickard v. Filburn decision, at about the same time, which allowed the Congress to use the "Commerce clause" of Article I, Section 8 to mean anything it wanted and justify any law whatsoever, it created an Unlimited Federal Government and justified it with the language of a document that created a Limited Federal Government.

    What could be more corrupt than that?

    The first, second and last order of business needs to be the overturning of these corrupt interpretation of the Constitution and a return to Constitutional order in the United States Government. This must be the over-ridding and long term goal of all movements such as the tea party and the conservative movements.

    Their purpose cannot be to allow liberalism to move at a slower pace, they must have their own agenda that they stand for. They must have a purpose and goal they they are constantly striving for. Just as the liberal have striven for 80 years to implement Socialism in the US, the conservatives must now strive just as hard and just as long for a restoration of Constitutionalism. They must not rest until this achieved and the Constitution, as commonly understood by its text, is restored. Corrupt decisions as mentioned above must be either overturned or overridden.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. Tech_Esq
    Offline

    Tech_Esq Sic Semper Tyrannis!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,408
    Thanks Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Ratings:
    +558
    Out of curiosity, why do you bring up pin pricks in the face of vast torrents?

    Is it in an effort to justify a sea with a puddle?
     
  7. Big Black Dog
    Offline

    Big Black Dog Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    22,906
    Thanks Received:
    5,107
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,702
    Just like the Bible, the Constitution is intended to be followed word for word and is not a living document at all. It means what it says.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. bigrebnc1775
    Offline

    bigrebnc1775 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    64,004
    Thanks Received:
    3,798
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Location:
    Kannapolis, N.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,830
    A new flavor of koolaid we will call it Liberal twist
    not meant to mix with the truth.
     
  9. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    Constitution in Exile

    well well well,

    turning back the clock is no way to move forward
     
  10. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,518
    Thanks Received:
    5,898
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,928
    Yes we know you do not care for the truth you lying hack. You are fine with destroying the Constitution, well except when Republicans are in charge, then you whine like a baby stuck with a safety pin.
     

Share This Page