Is the constitution outdated?

MacTheKnife

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2018
Messages
5,975
Reaction score
2,023
Points
325
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
 

Mousterian

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
1,948
Reaction score
269
Points
140
The Constitution allows you to argue your opinion based on your interpretation of it.
The official interpretation is determined by the color of the Supreme Court at any given time.
So it can protect you, or threaten your welfare, depending on the composition of this politically appointed covey of witches.
 

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,087
Reaction score
9,029
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
You think it is out dated? Then get enough votes in Congress to hold a convention to change it. Otherwise just obey it.
 

Kosh

Quick Look Over There!
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
24,717
Reaction score
2,645
Points
280
Location
Everywhere but nowhere
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
Yes Obama and the far left thought the same thing..

To the far left it is just a GD piece of paper..
 

Crepitus

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
36,359
Reaction score
6,114
Points
1,140
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
Living documents evolve. They never get outdated. These so called "originalists", they are outdated.
 
OP
MacTheKnife

MacTheKnife

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2018
Messages
5,975
Reaction score
2,023
Points
325
The Constitution allows you to argue your opinion based on your interpretation of it.
The official interpretation is determined by the color of the Supreme Court at any given time.
So it can protect you, or threaten your welfare, depending on the composition of this politically appointed covey of witches.
Yes, I completely agree....I think a lot of people overlook that.....so in essence I think you would admit that the Supreme Court is the one that protects us or puts us in danger. And, since Presidents or the congress or some combination thereof determine who is on the Supreme Ct. it is the people who by their actions of voting actually determine their own safety and security. And, unfortunately the people often make the wrong decisions.. That is how we got someone like ginsburg.

Thus I must conclude the constitution is not the great protector of the people as so many mistakenly believe.
 

Kosh

Quick Look Over There!
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
24,717
Reaction score
2,645
Points
280
Location
Everywhere but nowhere
The Constitution allows you to argue your opinion based on your interpretation of it.
The official interpretation is determined by the color of the Supreme Court at any given time.
So it can protect you, or threaten your welfare, depending on the composition of this politically appointed covey of witches.
Yes, I completely agree....I think a lot of people overlook that.....so in essence I think you would admit that the Supreme Court is the one that protects us or puts us in danger. And, since Presidents or the congress or some combination thereof determine who is on the Supreme Ct. it is the people who by their actions of voting actually determine their own safety and security. And, unfortunately the people often make the wrong decisions.. That is how we got someone like ginsburg.

Thus I must conclude the constitution is not the great protector of the people as so many mistakenly believe.
Exactly direct from the far left doctrines..

SCOTUS is supposed to determine what is and what is not Constitutional, not legislate from the bench.

That is why you never vote far left!
 
OP
MacTheKnife

MacTheKnife

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2018
Messages
5,975
Reaction score
2,023
Points
325
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
Yes Obama and the far left thought the same thing..

To the far left it is just a GD piece of paper..
I seem to remember George Bush saying that? Am I wrong? hmmmmm ...pardon me while I look that up:

Capitol Hill Blue, reported that president George Bush responded to GOP concerns (behind a closed door, non-verifiable meeting) about the more onerous provisions of the Patriot Act renewal in a rather cheney like manner.

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”
 

cnm

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
31,545
Reaction score
13,039
Points
2,905
Location
Aotearoa
Yes, a system where a voter in one state may have an effective voting power multiples of a voter in another state is well past its use by date. Combined with legislation the US Constitution ensures unequal representation of US citizens. If for no other reason than that it should be amended, at the least.
Too, the two house Congress is unwieldy, with the 2nd house of little benefit except to ignore the will of the people. I will concede it was probably created with this in mind, but such notions are now outdated.
 
Last edited:
OP
MacTheKnife

MacTheKnife

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2018
Messages
5,975
Reaction score
2,023
Points
325
Is the constitution outdated?

Ummm ... no.
How about the provision that says a President must be a natural born citizen? That does not seem applicable today. As in it was ignored in regards to obama....and even worse the Supreme Court who is set up to resolve matters involving constitutional disputes would not even consider how the constitution requirement applied to obama as in they said it was a political matter ....not a matter for the court. Were they just too cowardly to deem a black presidential contender...unqualilfied?
 

cnm

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
31,545
Reaction score
13,039
Points
2,905
Location
Aotearoa
How about the provision that says a President must be a natural born citizen? That does not seem applicable today. As in it was ignored in regards to obama
Are you a birther?
 

Kosh

Quick Look Over There!
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
24,717
Reaction score
2,645
Points
280
Location
Everywhere but nowhere
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
Yes Obama and the far left thought the same thing..

To the far left it is just a GD piece of paper..
I seem to remember George Bush saying that? Am I wrong? hmmmmm ...pardon me while I look that up:

Capitol Hill Blue, reported that president George Bush responded to GOP concerns (behind a closed door, non-verifiable meeting) about the more onerous provisions of the Patriot Act renewal in a rather cheney like manner.

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”
No he never said that, that is just another debunked far left religious narrative.

Bush: The Constitution a 'Goddamned Piece of Paper'? - FactCheck.org
 

Kosh

Quick Look Over There!
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
24,717
Reaction score
2,645
Points
280
Location
Everywhere but nowhere
Yes, a system where a voter in one state may have an effective voting power multiples of a voter in another state is well past its use by date. Combined with legislation it ensures unequal representation of US citizens. If for no other reason than that it should be amended, at the least.
Too, the two house Congress is unwieldy, with the 2nd house of little benefit except to ignore the will of the people. I will concede it was probably created with this in mind, but such notions are now outdated.
Another fine example of a far left drone not understanding the Constitution.

Just pushing another debunked far left religious narrative.

Here this may help you:

https://www.usconstitution.net/constkidsK.html
 
OP
MacTheKnife

MacTheKnife

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2018
Messages
5,975
Reaction score
2,023
Points
325
How about the provision that says a President must be a natural born citizen? That does not seem applicable today. As in it was ignored in regards to obama
Are you a birther?
It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president after all for the following reason:

'Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between “December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986.” Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, which of course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal. US Law very clearly stipulates: “If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.” Barack Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama’s mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama’s birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn’t matter *after* . In essence, she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship. At most, there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time of Barack Obama’s birth when she was 18 in Hawaii. His mother would have needed to have been 16+5= 21 years old, at the time of Barack Obama’s birth for him to have been a natural-born citizen. As aforementioned, she was a young college student at the time and was not. Barack Obama was already 3 years old at that time his mother would have needed to have waited to have him as the only U.S. Citizen parent. Obama instead should have been naturalized, but even then, that would still disqualify him from holding the office.'

Thus the constitution was ignored, not enforced and thus once again demonstrates how irrelevant it can be in some cases.
 

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
32,238
Reaction score
3,229
Points
1,130
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
The Constitution has some very good things, and some things that aren't working any more.

1) The way people vote is not working any more.

If the states are to have supremacy over the feds, then make it so. If the feds have supremacy over the states, then let everyone have equal say in the how the country works, rather than a half in/half out system which only benefits the rich.

2) The separation of powers is a good thing, however it could potentially do with a massive shake up.

I might consider things like making the president more of a political body than a one person affair.

Yes, have a president who is in charge of making decisions in certain aspects, but in terms of say, education, healthcare etc, there could be an elected person on the presidency who deals with this, who could potentially be from a different party, and who gets elected on a mandate for that one issue.
 

Two Thumbs

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
38,215
Reaction score
6,495
Points
1,140
Location
Where ever I go, there I am.
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
It prevents people from voting to take all your stuff and give it to themselves.

there's a reason we are not a democracy
 

Two Thumbs

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
38,215
Reaction score
6,495
Points
1,140
Location
Where ever I go, there I am.
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
Living documents evolve. They never get outdated. These so called "originalists", they are outdated.
what part of it needs to 'evolve'?
 

Two Thumbs

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
38,215
Reaction score
6,495
Points
1,140
Location
Where ever I go, there I am.
I am beginning to think the constitution is highly overated. I have talked to people who say the constitution protects me an my family.

How so?

Not even to mention all the Presidents who have violated it. So what gives?
Yes Obama and the far left thought the same thing..

To the far left it is just a GD piece of paper..
I seem to remember George Bush saying that? Am I wrong? hmmmmm ...pardon me while I look that up:

Capitol Hill Blue, reported that president George Bush responded to GOP concerns (behind a closed door, non-verifiable meeting) about the more onerous provisions of the Patriot Act renewal in a rather cheney like manner.

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”
yeah, you got a :link: to back that up?
 

Erinwltr

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
7,195
Reaction score
1,105
Points
275
Jesus, where is Pogo when you need him....
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top