We DO NOT Have a Living Constitution

[Kondor3]

The United States Constitution is, indeed, a "living, breathing document" - subject to evolved interpretation as the nature and needs of the Republic change.

And, of course, the Supreme Court is the Ultimate Authority for its interpretation.

If, in the future, the Court overturns Roe v Wade or other LibProg Sacred Cows, then, that too, is an evolving interpretation based upon the nature and needs of the Republic.

The Founding Fathers did not intend the Constitution to be a Perpetual Straight-Jacket.

We are now embarking upon an era in which the Court will serve up decisions more in line with Conservative rather than Liberal values.

Checks and balances, on an ongoing basis.

LibProgs go too far, then Conservatives checkmate them for a while.

Eventually, we'll rinse-and-repeat the entire cycle, over a generation or two or three.

 

[candycorn]

If I know your SSN, can I shout it out on main street to anyone who will listen? Or what if you have AIDS...can I tell people that you have this disease?

Can we tell we people that you have scheduled with your doctor to have your head extracted from your ass ?

No but we can tell you're a douchebag.

 

[candycorn]

If I know your SSN, can I shout it out on main street to anyone who will listen? Or what if you have AIDS...can I tell people that you have this disease?

Well folks?

 

[Meister]

If I know your SSN, can I shout it out on main street to anyone who will listen? Or what if you have AIDS...can I tell people that you have this disease?

Well folks?

I do believe that your questions were answered in post #4

 

[JBond]

If I know your SSN, can I shout it out on main street to anyone who will listen? Or what if you have AIDS...can I tell people that you have this disease?

Well folks?

Now that the government is collecting all the info you are whining about, is that a good thing?

 

[candycorn]

So anyone that knows your SSN can publish it without fear of violating the law?

What about credit card numbers?

You guys okay with that too?

 

[Bush92]

The Constitution of the United States is the foundation upon which our nation rest. Rule of law is what the Founders intended. Not activists jurist from lower courts legislating from the bench.

 

[Bush92]

The words of the United States Constitution are not to be reworked or legislatively overturned by activists liberals judges who feel the Constitution is a living document. Strict constructionist view is the correct one.
Loose Construction versus Strict Construction | Conservatism In The United States | United States Government

Tell us about those well regulated militias

Tell us about the will of the people and Prop 8? States rights.
Voters approve Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriages

 

[Bush92]

The United States Constitution is, indeed, a "living, breathing document" - subject to evolved interpretation as the nature and needs of the Republic change.

And, of course, the Supreme Court is the Ultimate Authority for its interpretation.

If, in the future, the Court overturns Roe v Wade or other LibProg Sacred Cows, then, that too, is an evolving interpretation based upon the nature and needs of the Republic.

The Founding Fathers did not intend the Constitution to be a Perpetual Straight-Jacket.

We are now embarking upon an era in which the Court will serve up decisions more in line with Conservative rather than Liberal values.

Checks and balances, on an ongoing basis.

LibProgs go too far, then Conservatives checkmate them for a while.

Eventually, we'll rinse-and-repeat the entire cycle, over a generation or two or three.

The Founding Fathers intended the legislatures of the states to be the driving force in our nation. Also, under checks and balances, the legislative branch suggests law and debates it. Executive branch decides on it, and judicial branch interprets it based on the Constitution they set down. District courts are not, nor ever intended to, do the job of the other two branches based on their random political beliefs.

 

[Bush92]

Court decisions change its interpretation

Wrong answer since the Warren Court.

 

[Natural Citizen]

A living constitution is effectively a dead constitution in that it is completely unable to protect us from an encroaching government. Any government would be delighted to have this, however, because anyone can raise an arbitrary victim status card and then we get judges marched out to tell us we don't understand our constitution.

 

[Natural Citizen]

And I've yet to find judicial review any place in Article III. Judicial review is a power given to the court by itself.

Jefferson held them off the first time they tried it but after he died, they went right back to it.

 

[Natural Citizen]

The words of the United States Constitution are not to be reworked or legislatively overturned by activists liberals judges who feel the Constitution is a living document. Strict constructionist view is the correct one.
Loose Construction versus Strict Construction | Conservatism In The United States | United States Government

Do you know what you are talking about and are you able to give examples, or have you been stuck following bumper stickers in rush hour traffic for most of your life?

If he doesn't want to, then, I will.

And eagerly.

 

[Norman]

My interpretation of activist, a person who can not read.

My interpretation of the constitution... who gives a fuck? Read what it says, it's not meant to be interpreted.

 

[Kondor3]

The Constitution of the United States is the foundation upon which our nation rest. Rule of law is what the Founders intended. Not activists jurist from lower courts legislating from the bench.

Rule of Law.

And SCOTUS is the ultimate interpreter of that Law.

 

[longknife]

The words of the United States Constitution are not to be reworked or legislatively overturned by activists liberals judges who feel the Constitution is a living document. Strict constructionist view is the correct one.
Loose Construction versus Strict Construction | Conservatism In The United States | United States Government

Our Founders were very wise. They provided for a way of making changes to the Constitution if it is done through the mechanism provided.

One only has to look at other countries with :"living constitutions" and the abuses that arise there. Turkey is a prime example.

 

[Kondor3]

My interpretation of activist, a person who can not read.

My interpretation of the constitution... who gives a fuck? Read what it says, it's not meant to be interpreted.

Without the context of the Social Fabric that it is meant to govern, the Constitution isn't worth the parchment it's written on.

Viewed within the context of the Social Fabric that it is meant to govern, the Constitution is the Supreme Law of that Social Fabric.

Interpretation is the process by which both the Spirit and the Letter of The Law are applied to the evolving Social Fabric that the Constitution is intended to serve.

Constructionist thinking is merely one opinion on the extent to which Interpretation should be applied; minimalism, not a complete rejection of the concept.

If there was no need for Interpretation, there would be no need for a Supreme Court, to deal with Constitutional issues on an ongoing basis.

The Constitution is the Ultimate Expression of the Will of the People, and the Will of the People changes from time to time, requiring adjustments in Interpretation.

The Founding Fathers crafted a Constitution so that the Social Fabric would willingly participate in the life of the Republic, not to lock them into a narrow framework.

The Constitution is subject to constant and ongoing Interpretation throughout the entire history of the Republic that it regulates.

Only fools and dullards and simpletons believe otherwise.

 

[TNHarley]

The words of the United States Constitution are not to be reworked or legislatively overturned by activists liberals judges who feel the Constitution is a living document. Strict constructionist view is the correct one.
Loose Construction versus Strict Construction | Conservatism In The United States | United States Government

The only way our Constitution could be considered a "living document" is if you consider the amendment process.
Fuck activists and their interpretations. The Constitution is clear.

 

[Meister]

So anyone that knows your SSN can publish it without fear of violating the law?

What about credit card numbers?

You guys okay with that too?

How about a strawman argument?

 

[candycorn]

So anyone that knows your SSN can publish it without fear of violating the law?

What about credit card numbers?

You guys okay with that too?

How about a strawman argument?

It’s understandable that you’re afraid to answer the question....poor baby