Harry Guerrilla
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2008
- Messages
- 28,951
- Reaction score
- 12,422
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
The ability for them to rebel was larger than it would be today, much because of our current technology around travel, considering the enemy they were fighting was several thousand miles away, separated by an ocean.
And who is saying we should give it up?
In short, I know the Constitution isn't perfect, but I strongly suspect it is far better than what we'd end up with, if we appointed a bunch of "modern thinkers" to write a new one.
I'll stick with the Founders, thanks.
Then why should we change what we have?
What purpose would it serve to amend The Constitution further?
Who is talking about amending the Constitution?
What's all the hoopla about the founding ideas and The Constitution?
What are we debating for?
What's all the hoopla about the founding ideas and The Constitution?
What are we debating for?
The flavor of the day is interpretation.
I believe we are discussing, in this thread, the FF and Constitutional interpretation... as any thread about the founding fathers eventually moves towards. I do not believe that we are discussing amending the Constitution, though that might be an ancillary issue.
Do you know of john rawls?:2razz:
It be in English, Old English I'll grant you but what's so hard to understand?
Yes. So?
Rawles is no Franklin or Jefferson.
I don't find much difficulty in understanding them at all. Some people believe that they are interpreted differently, however.
To you perhaps, but as I said from the outset of my entry into this conversation:
I'm pretty much assured that there is few to no spelling and punctuation errors.
With that in mind, we get a person who specializes in 18th century literature and sentence structure to make it understandable in modern English.
Problem solved.
Wanna see how many different interpretations there are of the Hebrew bible, by linguistic scholars?
And the amendment process is how the constitution is changed, which is why it is an evolving document.
:roll:
Good lord, it's English.
It's not a 5000 year old dead language.
(Not saying Hebrew is but the Hebrew Bible is much older and much different than something from 200-300 years ago.)
I feel like we're reaching around our elbow to get to our ass here.
Read some Old English. It can be pretty confusing at times. Besides, you know those linguists. Can't agree on anything.
Just turn in upside down.
Things get much clearer.
Read some Old English. It can be pretty confusing at times. Besides, you know those linguists. Can't agree on anything.
I've never understood this ancestor-worship of our Founding Fathers (and that's exactly what it is).
Our Founding Fathers owned slaves, disenfranchised women, embargoed the entire world, went to war for silly reasons, committed genocide against Native Americans, and had temper tantrums at mild tax increases. For many of them, even their support for representative democracy or checks and balances was wavering at best.
The Constitution was basically a compromise that was cobbled together from the various ideas that were floating around at one particular moment in time 221 years ago. Anyone who think it's perfect or even close to perfect is deluding themselves.
Some of their ideas can be built upon. Some of their ideas were just ridiculous and have no place in the United States of 2010, which (if you haven't noticed) has changed a bit since 1789.
Yea, technology has changed but humans have not.
You may want people to evolve, you can't make them though.
Yes, they have.
I don't have to "make them"; they already did.
In the FFs' time, I wouldn't have even been considered human (although I would've been considered human enough to own other humans that were considered even less human than myself).
People have evolved a lot. And we're not done yet.
You would be considered human, just not intelligent or rational enough to handle your own affairs.
One or several wrongs doesn't = always wrong.
I'm wrong a lot, so were they, we're all human.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?