American Politics Question
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
From: Paradise, San Diego
BHibbs- i agree this is a stupid argument and i would not be doing it...but it is required by the class and we were assigned the topic so there was not much i could do
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,034
Likes: 0
From: VA
Examples are all around you. The crux of the 'living docment' crowd is that the founding fathers 'could not have anticpated (fill in the blank), therefore we need to 'adjust' the Constitution to fit these modern times.
The internet, for example. The founders could not have known about the internet when they wrote the first ammendment.
Or assault weapons when they wrote the 2nd.
Thinks of something modern and find out which ammendment could apply. The H bomb, etc....
The internet, for example. The founders could not have known about the internet when they wrote the first ammendment.
Or assault weapons when they wrote the 2nd.
Thinks of something modern and find out which ammendment could apply. The H bomb, etc....
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,506
Likes: 0
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
I disagree. The Constitution can be amended, but it is not a "living" document. The principles it enumerates are timeless. It is a shame that political hacks have cheapened, abused, and denied so much of it in an effort to make a name for themselves and or their party.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
From: Bismarck, ND
Pfft.. This is a rediculous arguement. I hate to break it to you, but BOTH parties "believe" in a Living Document.
If a Democrat wants to make an Ammendment to the constitution and ban Slavery or something, they're Not listening to the demands of our Forefathers.
If a Republican wants to Ammend the Constitution to Ban Flag Burning, Abortion, or Gay Marriage, it's because "that's what the Forefather's supposedly "Meant" to say when they were writing it.."
Exactly which one of these Ammendments Don't you want??? (other than the 18th.
)
http://www.superkids.com/aweb/pages/...n/amndmnts.htm
If a Democrat wants to make an Ammendment to the constitution and ban Slavery or something, they're Not listening to the demands of our Forefathers.
If a Republican wants to Ammend the Constitution to Ban Flag Burning, Abortion, or Gay Marriage, it's because "that's what the Forefather's supposedly "Meant" to say when they were writing it.."
Exactly which one of these Ammendments Don't you want??? (other than the 18th.
)http://www.superkids.com/aweb/pages/...n/amndmnts.htm
Oh and the arguemet that it isn't a "living documnet" still hold true. The founding fathers put methods in place to ammend the constitution if things change. They did not intend for how it is written to be interpreted differently, just because times have changed. Basically, take the constitution for what it is, at face value, exactly how it is written. If changes must be made, it must be in the form of an ammendment. The concept of a "living document" implies changes can be made without going through this process.
Last edited by BennyHanna; Apr 29, 2008 at 04:15 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,034
Likes: 0
From: VA
Ah, I should have read ALL of the replies then. :o
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
From: Paradise, San Diego
Finally finished the paper...turned it in...got an 87%. My teacher is a hard *** while grading papers. Thank you everyone who helped, especially you crAz3d. I really appreciate everyones help. I passed the class!!! Have a good weekend everyone
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,512
Likes: 1
From: >wwOwww<
A reply from an old uneducated fart. Infact aren't the first 10 amenments of the constistution dead. I understand the arguement for the rest is living. prohabiton is proof of that. But the first ten amendments will never change. Would that help your arguement any.
Thanks!
Tumba
Thanks!
Tumba
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 774
Likes: 1
From: western washington
The republicans were the ones that were anti-slavery. Lincoln was a republican. Thought you might like to know.
Oh and the arguemet that it isn't a "living documnet" still hold true. The founding fathers put methods in place to ammend the constitution if things change. They did not intend for how it is written to be interpreted differently, just because times have changed. Basically, take the constitution for what it is, at face value, exactly how it is written. If changes must be made, it must be in the form of an ammendment. The concept of a "living document" implies changes can be made without going through this process.
Oh and the arguemet that it isn't a "living documnet" still hold true. The founding fathers put methods in place to ammend the constitution if things change. They did not intend for how it is written to be interpreted differently, just because times have changed. Basically, take the constitution for what it is, at face value, exactly how it is written. If changes must be made, it must be in the form of an ammendment. The concept of a "living document" implies changes can be made without going through this process.
