> There are very good reasons for everything in the constitution, but each is only as strong as those reasons. In the absence of good reasons for something, the

> There are very good reasons for everything in the constitution, but each is only as strong as those reasons. In the absence of good reasons for something, the fact that it's part of the constitution does not matter very much! If anything, it means the constitution should be changed--that's why we have a ready amendment mechanism. We thought the reasons weren't holding up anymore, we could have changed it, but that takes so long so we just did it in secret, thats ok yea? Its "just the constitution". Is this your standpoint? > The constitution is great, but it's hardly the perfect authority on everything and shouldn't be revered as such. It was supposed to be. And when things were found to no longer work it was supposed to be amended with all branches of government having their say. If one thing can be disregarded "because its not perfect" then all things can be disregarded. Or at least, if you think they can't just all be disregarded, because some things would be crossing the line, who is the one that gets to draw the line? Previously we had this piece of paper which drew the line, but then this guy said online it wasn't perfect.