4 ms·
At what point should we stop considering the unstated or not explicitly codified thoughts of the writers of the Constitution? I swore an oath to defend that cl
by AndrewKemendo 3y ago
At what point should we stop considering the unstated or not explicitly codified thoughts of the writers of the Constitution?
I swore an oath to defend that cloth multiple times and at this point it’s not clear that it holds up to 21st century scrutiny for being the kind of governing document we would create, should we have an opportunity to do so.
- 1letterunixname 3y agoIt's a magical religion used to rationalize whatever position a speaker wants to push. Appeal to dead revered authority's supposed intent fallacy. Instead, we should be honest, wise, cautious, aware of history, and principled about the needs and concerns now and for the future that diverged significantly due to differences in technology and geopolitics while human nature hasn't changed all that much. American politics are definitely more corrupt, less educated, less principled, and more divided than any point apart from the 1840's.
- paulddraper 3y agoThe writers of the Constitution and the people who democratically ratified their product. The Constitution is absolutely open to change via democratic means, but in absence of that, it is the democratic product of the people.
- AndrewKemendo 3y agoTell me again who could vote for this document?