|
||||||
 |
Recent Posts | Search by username | |
Contact Us | |
Login | |
Register |
 |
 |
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
24HourForums.com > The Top 10 Supported Forums > 24's Political Matters > Is the Constitution a "living document" |
| Moderated by: 24HourNut | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...   |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
24HourNut Administrator  aka Frank
|
  |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian wrote: 24HourNut wrote:Brian wrote:24HourNut wrote:I have said, and I will continue to say, that the Constitution is a legal document between the citizens of this country, and our government, and does don't grant individual rights to non citizens except in certain cases. Philosophical difference here, perhaps. I feel as though humans inherently have rights by virtue of the fact that no other organism inherently has rights over us. In other words, no organism, human or not, is inherently authorized to take away our freedom, even though other humans and organizations manage to.
 The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24HourNut wrote: Brian wrote:Okay, I see what you're saying. But I'd still argue that people aren't inherently free, so therefore free people don't inherently have those rights. Rather, they had to either a) fight their ass off for them, b) agree on the rights among themselves and codify them, or c) both. Once they've got those rights, they're entitled to them. Without the Revolutionary War, the Constitution wouldn't have been worth the parchment it was written on, and many of the rights contained within it simply wouldn't exist, whether the colonists thought they were endowed by their creator or not. Understood, and I think it's an important philosophical difference. From where I'm coming from, no one is inherently authorized to do anything (either to claim or deny rights) because (again, under my philosophical framework) there's no inherent authorizing authority. Basically, you have the rights you can win yourself.
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The amendment process makes it a living document.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"there's no inherent authorizing authority." The Declaration of Independence recognizes an inherent authority. That would be God and that God would be the God of the Bible, at least in the minds of the Founders. The DOI is our nations founding document. It recognizes the individual people have inalienable rights grant to us by God. The Constitution clarifies the powers granted to the Federal government by the People.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
muddawber Guardian1000© Member 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: The amendment process makes it a living document. No, the amendment process makes it an amendable document, able to change the contract if needed. What makes it a living document is those who would have the meaning of what is already written, changed to suit their whims.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
JustifiedByFaith Pioneer100© Member  Searching The Hearts Of Man
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I see both your points. The courts are good at amending, twisting and re-interpreting. It reminds me of several non-Christian groups who are able to only convince themselves that something says what they think or what they would really like it to say. Last edited on 04:48 am by JustifiedByFaith Jesus said, "Take heed that no one deceives you." Matthew 24:4 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
muddawber "No, the amendment process makes it an amendable document, able to change the contract if needed." Based on my understand the phrase "living document" is intended to convey changable (versus dead and static). The Constitution is clearly a changable document. The problem is those that would like to make the changes can't do it via the amendment process due to lack of support for the changes being sought so they attempt to do what you are describing, reinterpret the language.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: The Declaration of Independence recognizes an inherent authority. That would be God and that God would be the God of the Bible, at least in the minds of the Founders. The Declaration of Independence credits a Creator with endowing the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But the Declaration of Independence isn't a legal document. The legal document is the Constitution. Again, appealing to God as your authority for rights is a useless exercise. God simply isn't in the position to grant or deny human rights. Ask anyone who's not in a democracy. You don't gain rights until you win them.
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"But the Declaration of Independence isn't a legal document. The legal document is the Constitution." Define "legal document". "Again, appealing to God as your authority for rights is a useless exercise. God simply isn't in the position to grant or deny human rights. Ask anyone who's not in a democracy. You don't gain rights until you win them." Brian, I'm appealing to the same God the Founders that wrote the Declaration and Constitution appealed to. Their claim was the basis of our rights and freedoms, and ultimately the laws enacted to recognize and protect those rights and freedoms, come from God.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: "But the Declaration of Independence isn't a legal document. The legal document is the Constitution." The Declaration of Independence has nothing to do with the laws of the United States. It is exactly what it says it is: a declaration of independence. Its purpose is solely political, not legal. (They were under no legal obligation to declare their independence.) pmh1nic wrote: "Again, appealing to God as your authority for rights is a useless exercise. God simply isn't in the position to grant or deny human rights. Ask anyone who's not in a democracy. You don't gain rights until you win them." But that's just the point, PMH: The laws and rights don't come from God. You could have a completely atheistic state that grants its citizens the same rights (e.g., the French Republic). In fact, the Declaration of Independence makes clear in the very next sentence where the power to grant and deny rights comes from: "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," In fact, for centuries prior to this, monarchs had appealed to the "divine right of kings" to do whatever they chose to do, and maintain absolute rule. The framers were paying lip service to the Creator, but they were in fact bucking the system it helped create. ("Slaves, obey your masters" and all that...) It's not as if the concept of democracy had been hiding, unnoticed, in the Bible for thousands of years.
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Saint Forum-Blogger© Pioneer100© Member  Polymath
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Yes...it is a living document. One word: "prohibition." First it's not there, then it is, then it's not again. How living can you get?
A^2 + B^2 = C^2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"The Declaration of Independence has nothing to do with the laws of the United States. It is exactly what it says it is: a declaration of independence. Its purpose is solely political, not legal. (They were under no legal obligation to declare their independence.)" Wrong! The fundamental principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence are the foundation of our laws and form of government. Its purpose was legal, defining not only the basis of our laws and government but establishing the criteria for desolve the laws that govern a nation.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
sirlamre Pioneer100© Member  Official Forum Troublemaker
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
""That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"" yeah, that sentence certainly doesn't read: ""That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the divine authority God granted to them" now does it?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
sirlamre "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," The governed have the ability to consent because that right is recognized as having been given to them by God. Governments are established not to grant these rights but to help secure them. And when a government fails to secure those rights or does things to usurp those rights the people can overthrow that government based on the fundamental principle (law) which is stated in the DOI as a law or principle established by God.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: "The Declaration of Independence has nothing to do with the laws of the United States. It is exactly what it says it is: a declaration of independence. Its purpose is solely political, not legal. (They were under no legal obligation to declare their independence.)" The Constitution lays down the fundamental principles of our laws and government. The Declaration of Independence did one thing and one thing only: It declared our independence. In the process of doing that, it explained why we were declaring our independence. It neither asserted any legal rights nor protected any. The Constitution is the legal document that does that. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is not the kind of thing you make a legal system out of.
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24HourForums.com > The Top 10 Supported Forums > 24's Political Matters > Is the Constitution a "living document" | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Site Supporters | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Posts Of The Day | Mock Forums | WowClassic | |
Themes and most mods done in collaboration with: WowClassic - powerful forum software with the best support service.
We are partners with Forum Owner Services
Powered by - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez
We are partners with Forum Owner Services
Powered by - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez