The founders understood quite well that times would change and the necessity to change the Constitution, however they also knew how dangerous it was for us to do so willy nilly as the Democrats have done
The founders allowed for amendments to facilitate change but they had no idea about the nature of those changes.Question: What willy nilly changes to the Constitution have been done by the Democrats?
Our founders understood that evil would lurk us such as Socialism, Communism, or some other dictator form of government that wishes to takeover this great nation.
I don't think any of those ideologies existed back then. Their angst was pitted against the monarchy of England. They seemed bent on discouraging one here.
But here we are 19 trillion dollars in debt and growing. It would never be this way had we just adhered to their words back when the union was formed.
What words were those?
In fact if we limited our spending only to what was outlined in the Constitution, not only would we be debt free, but taxes would be much lower and we'd probably have a surplus if anything.
Where does it limit spending in the Constitution? Before you answer consider that wars cost money as does policing the world!
They also understood the tragedy of the public becoming dependent on the federal government. Yet look at us today. Well more than half of our population is.
Why do you think the founders understood that?
Why do you think the founders understood that?
Because they were quite aware of what a massive federal government does to liberty. It's why they instituted States Rights. It's also why there are no federal social programs listed in the Constitution.
Yes, times have changed, but the concept was never though of. They could have had things like Cash for Carriages, or free firewood, perhaps a more antique version of HUD with free log cabin homes, or even subsidize farmers to give away free food to the poor instead of SNAP's. But again, never a consideration.
Where does it limit spending in the Constitution? Before you answer consider that wars cost money as does policing the world!
Consider that our federal leaders are charged with the protection of this country according to the US Constitution. You can't protect this country with muskets and cannons waiting along our borders for invaders. It takes million dollar bombs and missiles, the highest technology, and massive transportation for our solders and equipment to other countries. And if you don't want to be the world police, then others will be glad to take that job, so think about who has nearly our kind of power to do so.
What our government is to spend money on is in our US Constitution. If it's not a limitation and our founders wanted the federal government to spend on whatever they desired, then what was the point of listing what they were TO spend money on?
Just to give you one:
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, annals of Congress, 1794
I don't think any of those ideologies existed back then. Their angst was pitted against the monarchy of England. They seemed bent on discouraging one here.
No, I believe they were worried about all kinds of tyrants no matter what their government beliefs or systems are called today.
The founders allowed for amendments to facilitate change but they had no idea about the nature of those changes.Question: What willy nilly changes to the Constitution have been done by the Democrats?
Don't have time for the entire laundry list, but we'll just start with affirmative action. It's reverse discrimination and violates equal protection under the law. The Supreme Court had to overturn all kinds of regulations against the Second Amendment that various states incorporated by Democrats. Then of course there are other things like abortion and the non-existant Separation of Church and State where the words appear nowhere in the document. Hate Crimes? Those are extra penalties given to a person that violates a potential Democrat voter (gays, minorities) and again, a violation of equal protection under the law.
