Thread: The Value of the Constitution in the Modern U.S.

Our founding fathers had visions of freedom and independance that I hold dear. But some in today's U.S. would argue that those visions are outdated. Indeed, the U.S. hase certainly changed in its history, but are the values stated in the Constitution still relevant?

Some (like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) interpret the Constitution to mean whatever they want. They refer to my favorite document as a "faded piece of paper".

Others (like me) believe the Constitution should not be interperpreted. They hold look at it with reverance and believe that if the founders wrote it, it must lay out their perfect blueprint for this country.

What are your opinions????

Damn near perfect.

The U.S. Constitution should be interpreted as it is, an not filtered through any judge. The intepretation on the establishment and free exercise clause by groups such as the ACLU have really annoyed me as of late.

The establishment clause reads that there shall be no established national church or religion. So the government is inherently secular. Fine and dandy. In the free exercise clause, some interpret to mean freedom from religion so religious aspects are being banned all over, the real meaning of this clause is that you are free to practice any religion you choose without any say from the government as long as it does not harm another person.

Originally Posted by Tide

Our founding fathers had visions of freedom and independance that I hold dear. But some in today's U.S. would argue that those visions are outdated. Indeed, the U.S. hase certainly changed in its history, but are the values stated in the Constitution still relevant?

Some (like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) interpret the Constitution to mean whatever they want. They refer to my favorite document as a "faded piece of paper".

Others (like me) believe the Constitution should not be interperpreted. They hold look at it with reverance and believe that if the founders wrote it, it must lay out their perfect blueprint for this country.

What are your opinions????

The constitution was intended to be interpreted. That is the whole purpose of the judiciary.

Originally Posted by Ausinus

The constitution was intended to be interpreted. That is the whole purpose of the judiciary.

No, the purpose of the judiciary is to uphold the Constitution not interpret it.

I echo what Tide said.

I am with Tide.

Originally Posted by Tide

No, the purpose of the judiciary is to uphold the Constitution not interpret it.

I would argue that to uphold the Constitution they must be given some room to interpret it. If the Constitution were completely cut and dry, with no room for debate then upholding would be all that is necessary. It would appear that is not the case. Look at free speech, it has moved beyond simply speech and into the realm of expression, which strays quite far from just speaking. As society and technology have advanced there are some things that just aren't covered, without interpretation how exactly do you fit them in?

Originally Posted by Tide

Our founding fathers had visions of freedom and independance that I hold dear. But some in today's U.S. would argue that those visions are outdated. Indeed, the U.S. hase certainly changed in its history, but are the values stated in the Constitution still relevant?

Some (like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) interpret the Constitution to mean whatever they want. They refer to my favorite document as a "faded piece of paper".

Others (like me) believe the Constitution should not be interperpreted. They hold look at it with reverance and believe that if the founders wrote it, it must lay out their perfect blueprint for this country.

What are your opinions????

Our Form of government was the first of its type in 6000 years. And it offered men freedom. The new systems being offered us today are socialism and Communism...neither of which offer freedom but slavery for all but the RICH.


Daniel Webster

"There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from anothe quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men and become the instruments of their own undoing."

"Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster, and what has happened once in 6000 years, may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world."

I don't know. I'm starting to think we have a flawed document. The Constitution suposedly exists to limit government, something which isn't happening today. We seem to have out lived it's ability to restrain powerfull men.