vision2020
Re: US Constitution and Mutating Ethics
Mr. Tom Hansen,
You said:
> The US Constitution was purposely worded generically so as to allow the future
> to interpret it the way that it should apply at the time.
This is not true. The wording of the US Constitution was very specific. It is the
law of the land. And in order to allow for changes that the future might bring
the founders created a method to allow for changes to the US Constitution. It is
called the "amendment process." You might have heard of it. The amendment process
is the "only" valid way in which the US Constitition can change according to the
will of the people. Laws should never be just reinterpreted to change their meaning.
To have the method as you describe of just interpreting the US Constitution any
way we want for any reasons we want will result in anarchy. And also, why even
have a written law if we can just ignore those parts that we find repugnant by
just reinterpreting them to mean what we want. In this case the US Constitution
isn't worth the paper it was written on. But I guess it all depends on what the
definition of the word "is" is.
Just remember, the founders knew that they couldn't foresee all that the future
would bring, therefore they built into the US Constitution a legal means make
appropriate changes, it is the "amendment process" - not reinterpretation.
Cheers!
John Harrell
--- thansen@moscow.com wrote:
> Greetings Visionaires -
>
> Ed Evans stated:
>
> " . . . I am willing to continue this thread if you can demonstrate that our
> current Constitution, and it's interpretation, do not contradict the ethical
> principles the founding fathers held two centuries ago."
>
> Your question is similar to asking, "Why don't we still use Pony Express? It
> worked over a hundred years ago."
>
> The US Constitution was purposely worded generically so as to allow the future
> to interpret it the way that it should apply at the time.
>
> Let me guess your next question (as we have heard it from you several times
> before). Who specifically interprets and applies their values to the
> Constitution? That is very simple. The legislature and the US Supreme Court
> interpret the Constituion. "The People" vote in legislators. Supreme Court
> justices are appointed by the President and confirmed/rejected (after hearings)
> by a senate subcommittee made up of U.S. senators who are also elected by "the
> people".
>
> So, the long-term response to your question, Mr. Evans, is that "the people"
> interpret the US Constitution and apply it as appropriate.
>
> Take care,
>
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>
> *****************************************************************************
> Where would Christianity be if Jesus got eight to fifteen years, with time off
> for good behavior?
>
> -- New York Senator James H. Donovan commenting on capital punishment.
> *****************************************************************************
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent by First Step Internet.
> http://www.fsr.net/
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Back to TOC