Well we have to interpret it. The question is how do we interpret it.
Do we give the words the meaning that they had when the document was written?
Do we interpret it to narrowly or widely?
For instance look at the 4th search and seizure clause. That didn't apply to phone calls when written but it does now. To get that requires broader application of the document than it did at the time.
__________________
"Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow." ~Aesop
Well we have to interpret it. The question is how do we interpret it.
Do we give the words the meaning that they had when the document was written?
Do we interpret it to narrowly or widely?
For instance look at the 4th search and seizure clause. That didn't apply to phone calls when written but it does now. To get that requires broader application of the document than it did at the time.
Agreed. Any document has to be interpreted. A good question, imo, is whether it is a "living" document. It is in the sense that technologies change ( as mentioned by Baron) but it is not in that the original intent and purpose are REinterpreted as time goes on and people's concepts change.
As a matter of fact... we have reason to sue the federal government for breach of contract on one portion alone.
That being... Article IV Section 4
Quote:
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
The federal government is bound it's creating document (The Constitution) to maintain a republican form of government for every state.
The federal government poorly maintains even a democratic form of government (which is woefully inept compared to the republican form of government we were given by our forefathers).
The federal government goes all around the world "Spreading democracy" when they aren't even supposed to be maintaining a democracy even here.
Like the Bible... if we were to return to the original document of the Constitution and compare what we are supposed to have to what we have now our intended form of government is indistinguishable in what we have now.
We have wandered far, far, far from the document to the point that it is time to once again that our forefathers came to several hundred years ago.
Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
We have reached this place again.
It is, once again, time to throw off a government who has forgotten the governed and form another one.
The thing is, we can do this with what we have in place already.
All Americans should vote, but they don't. Far too many complain about the way things have been or are.
Get involved in the process, get your family, circle of friends, community even involved and use our form of government to fix our form of government.
It's a genius system, for those who are willing to work it.
No. ALL American should not vote. The vote of the uninformed is far more damaging than non-participation and is in large part why we are in this mess. They vote on sound bites and emotion, not on practical reality.
Case in point, the "Hope and Change" slogan sounded good to the uninformed, but to the informed, it was well understood what was being said.
I do wish there was some litmus test to qualify to vote. An I.D. is not even required in some states. Gimme me a break!
No. ALL American should not vote. The vote of the uninformed is far more damaging than non-participation and is in large part why we are in this mess. They vote on sound bites and emotion, not on practical reality.
Case in point, the "Hope and Change" slogan sounded good to the uninformed, but to the informed, it was well understood what was being said.
I do wish there was some litmus test to qualify to vote. An I.D. is not even required in some states. Gimme me a break!
If all Americans are equal, then all Americans should vote, if they are able to.
Even if some voted on emotion, others have voted on lies-- the lies of politicians of whom they thought they were well-informed about.
There are certain benefits that should be freely afforded to ALL AMERICANS as these benefits are what make America, America and the dream, pride and / or envy of so many around the world.
__________________
"The choices we make reveal the true nature of our character."
There are things not specifically mentioned in the Constitution so we have to apply the principles in the Constitution as we understand it to those specific things or instances.
__________________
Sam also known as Jim Ellis
Apostolic in doctrine
Pentecostal in experience
Charismatic in practice
Non-denominational in affiliation
Inter-denominational in fellowship
I agree with those who say the Constitution has to be interpreted. The devil as they say is in the details.
It is the “HOW” that matters. Should it be interpreted with a view of the original intent of the founders in mind? Or should it be interpreted with the view of modern social mores in mind?
I firmly hold with those who espose the doctrine of Original Intent
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
I agree with those who say the Constitution has to be interpreted. The devil as they say is in the details.
It is the “HOW” that matters. Should it be interpreted with a view of the original intent of the founders in mind? Or should it be interpreted with the view of modern social mores in mind?
I firmly hold with those who espose the doctrine of Original Intent
If only more people would approach their Bible that way.
Hybrid Mode
