Why do we ask what the founding fathers would have wanted?

[NYcarbineer]

lol, you're an idiot. Research divine right and John Locke's objections to it.

dear, why don't you research it and tell us what you learn and what your subject is if you have any idea?

Divine right was claimed as a Biblical prerogative.

Is the Bible wrong, or were the people who claimed it wrong?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Take what is good from the founders; abandon what was wrong.

It really is that simple.

 

[Ernie S.]

The founders didn't care what the King of England thought. Why should we care what the founders thought?

Precisely because they didn't care what a tyrant like BHO thought.

 

[OKTexas]

I don't understand this tradition.
My question is what exactly is the purpose of using the founding fathers or even the foundations of the United States as a means of creating laws in today's society. From what I understand none of the people who made a lot of the rules today are no longer alive. So why would we care what these people wanted? Maybe this is a stupid question but whenever I hear people argue about politics almost inevitably someone brings up the foundations of the country. I always thought that what was more important was what was better for the people in that society. So can someone please clarify why this seems to be a valid argument?

It isn't a valid argument unless you believe all progress ended at the end of the 18th century.

It's just a fallacious appeal to authority that especially conservatives like to use when it suits their agenda.

Well if that's the case just shut the fuck up, you have no right to free speech. You fucking idiots who wish to nullify the Constitution and ignore the people who wrote it as the foundation of all laws in this country should really pull your collective heads out of your collective asses. The founders knew the Constitution wasn't perfect and would need to be changed over time, that's why they included Article 5 and it's been used 27 times. Now you commiecrat assholes think it's old so it's OK to just ignore it, well guess what you don't get to pick which clauses you ignore like your dear leader thinks he can. You don't hold dear the things you like and just trash the rest, it doesn't work that way.

 

[danielpalos]

There is nothing Ambiguous regarding our federal Constitution and supreme law of the land.

 

[bedowin62]

Left-wing ideology ALWAYS at it's heart is a dictatorial ideology

the Left "knows" what is good for you and will go to any lengths to make you understand that, to "save" us from ourselves

 

[Iceweasel]

It isn't about tradition. The Constitution is our foundation, it's a system of laws and protections. Where we differ from European style democracies is that the government is for the people, by the people. The government is supposed to be ours. We own the government. That has been changing and eventually leads people to ask questions like why even bother.

The farther we move from it the more socialist we become and many of us don't see that as a good thing. Becoming a bankrupt nation, taking more and more from the people and being micromanaged by bureaucrats isn't something I would call a good thing.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I don't understand this tradition.
My question is what exactly is the purpose of using the founding fathers or even the foundations of the United States as a means of creating laws in today's society. From what I understand none of the people who made a lot of the rules today are no longer alive. So why would we care what these people wanted? Maybe this is a stupid question but whenever I hear people argue about politics almost inevitably someone brings up the foundations of the country. I always thought that what was more important was what was better for the people in that society. So can someone please clarify why this seems to be a valid argument?

Sounds like you think that just because it was a longtime ago people were stupid?
I would think these guys would have some valuable insight on what a tyrannical government was,and how to stop one from forming in the future,considering that thing with England and all.

 

[danielpalos]

Left-wing ideology ALWAYS at it's heart is a dictatorial ideology

the Left "knows" what is good for you and will go to any lengths to make you understand that, to "save" us from ourselves

like wars on crime, drugs, poverty, and terror?

 

[g5000]

The Founders were not monolithic in their thinking. If they were, there would not have been a Civil War.

Some of our Founders believed in a very strong central government (Hamilton), some deeply opposed a strong central government (Jefferson). Some believed in a government social safety net and even outlined programs we know today as "welfare" and "Social Security" (Paine). Still others believed we should have a progressive tax system with a certain percentage of Americans below a certain income level to remain untaxed (Jefferson).

I'd say our system would not surprise any of our Founders that much. I think they would be very impressed at our growth and our economic power and our world standing. The level of our "foreign entanglements" would probably concern them.

The only things which would shock their sensibilities would be on the social level. Our manner of dress, or lack of it. Our music. Interracial marriages. Same sex marriages. Reality TV. Spring break.

They would instantly recognize and approve of MSNBC, Fox News, Breitbart, Huffington Post, and all the hack partisan media outlets. These would communicate to our Founders the enshrinement of free speech had worked and was thriving.

 

[whitehall]

You gotta have a Constitution and Constitutional law is the basis of American society. As a matter of fact the United States Constitution written in one summer late in the 1700's changed the human race forever and we should respect that and be proud of America's heritage. For the first time government would be by the people and for the people rather than a whim of monarchs who stayed in power through intimidation. In a scant hundred years the United States went from an assortment of colonies to the world's 1st super power thanks to the Constitution. The dirty little secret is that the Founding Fathers wrote what they wanted and people who imagine what the FF thought or what they "really" wanted are the people who want to undermine Constitutional law.

 

[Iceweasel]

Another difference, they had the foresight to protect FROM government, our right to keep and bear arms. They saw what happened elsewhere and wanted the people empowered to keep government in check. That's one of the reasons leftist dislike the Constitution as is.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Founders were not monolithic in their thinking. If they were, there would not have been a Civil War.

1000% stupid and liberal of course. They were very very monolithic about creating a govt that was very very tiny and thus would not be a source of liberal evil as all other previous governments had been!!

 

[SillyWabbit]

I don't understand this tradition.
My question is what exactly is the purpose of using the founding fathers or even the foundations of the United States as a means of creating laws in today's society. From what I understand none of the people who made a lot of the rules today are no longer alive. So why would we care what these people wanted? Maybe this is a stupid question but whenever I hear people argue about politics almost inevitably someone brings up the foundations of the country. I always thought that what was more important was what was better for the people in that society. So can someone please clarify why this seems to be a valid argument?

Okay, let me get this straight: none of them are no longer alive? Well, that in and of itself makes them highly useful. I mean, it would seem they've overcome death itself and we should seek their advice forthwith.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

we should seek their advice forthwith.

i don't see why all they did was create the greatest county in human history by far!!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't understand this tradition.
My question is what exactly is the purpose of using the founding fathers or even the foundations of the United States as a means of creating laws in today's society. From what I understand none of the people who made a lot of the rules today are no longer alive. So why would we care what these people wanted? Maybe this is a stupid question but whenever I hear people argue about politics almost inevitably someone brings up the foundations of the country. I always thought that what was more important was what was better for the people in that society. So can someone please clarify why this seems to be a valid argument?

The Framers were very clear as to their intent:

A Constitutional Republic

Citizens subject solely to the rule of law, not men

Citizens' rights safeguarded by the Constitution and its case law

Federal laws and the rulings of the Federal courts are the supreme law of the land, binding on the states and local jurisdictions

The Federal courts – and ultimately the Supreme Court – determine what the Constitution means and the intent of the Framers, and determine the validity and constitutionality of Federal, state, and local laws and measures

The rights of citizens are paramount, the states and local jurisdictions subordinate to citizens' rights

The rights of citizens are inalienable, they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man

Citizens' rights are not subject to 'majority rule'

Citizens do not 'forfeit' their rights merely as a consequence of their state of residence

Although inalienable, citizens' rights are not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions by government.

As Justice Kennedy explained in Lawrence:

“Had those who drew and ratified the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth Amendment or the Fourteenth Amendment known the components of liberty in its manifold possibilities, they might have been more specific. They did not presume to have this insight. They knew times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress. As the Constitution endures, persons in every generation can invoke its principles in their own search for greater freedom.”

Citizens need only follow Constitutional case law to understand the intent of the Framers and whether given laws and measures comport with Constitutional case law; indeed, much of the litigation over the years could have been easily avoided if the states and local jurisdictions simply followed Constitutional jurisprudence.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Framers were very clear as to their intent:

yes very very clear that out govt would be very very limited and thus not a source of evil like all other previous govt's in human history had been!!

Welcome to your first lesson in American history!

now jones will give us his HS dropout response: "you are dead wrong"

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Citizens need only follow Constitutional case law.

the stupid liberal does not know that when you go the SCOTUS you pledge to unhold the Constitution, not the case law!!

 

[SillyWabbit]

Citizens need only follow Constitutional case law.

the stupid liberal does not know that when you go the SCOTUS you pledge to unhold the Constitution, not the case law!!

 

[danielpalos]

Our supreme code law of the land is by no means, ambiguous, at all.