Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 141

Thread: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

  1. #21
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    If you want to be technical, the Constitution is an implicit contract. I never signed and I never agreed to abide by it. I was born into it, not unlike how a slave may be born into bondage, and if I want to change it, then I have to get enough of my fellow slaves to rebel against it and vote in representatives to amend it.
    A failing of all forms of government.

    The Constitution claims to guarantee me certain rights and protections in exchange for adhering to it, but tyrannical majorities are constantly imposing their will on me and whenever a court steps into protect those civil rights that the Constitution claims to guarantee me, the members of the tyrannical majority call it "judicial activism" because it doesn't coincide with their interpretation of the document and the motives of the founders who wrote it 300 years ago.
    Bit of a generalization, don't you think? In any system where people disagree about what rights the Constitution protects, there will always be someone who complains about the evil tyrannical majority and how it's trampling his rights. Similarly, there will always be those who complains that the court's interpretations are contrary to the will and the intent of the majority. In your retelling of our world, your opinions are entirely reasonable while those of your opponents are tyrannical. You don't see anything hypocritical about that?

    The tyrannical majority also demand that a tyrannical majority be the only way that the Constitution be changed through the amendment process outlined in the Constitution itself.
    Unless you're characterizing every majority as a "tyrannical" majority, I don't know where you're getting this. If you do think that every majority is tyrannical, then the word has lost all meaning.

    So basically, unless you belong to the tyrannical majority, or form your own tyrannical majority, you have no rights, and the only system in place that can protect your individual rights, the court system, must adhere strictly to the document and the motives of the people who wrote it 300 years ago.
    Yes, because the rights in the Constitution inure only to those who belong to the tyrannical majority.

    Wow, what a convenient way to view the Constitution if you believe in preserving the status quo and are resistant to change. In other words, if you are Conservative.
    If you automatically attribute malicious motives to those who view things differently than you, then why would you expect anything better?

    Now let's look at the reality. Marbury v. Madison settled the dispute about whether courts had the power of constitutional interpretation. That means that since 1803, the Constitution has been a living document.
    No, that's not at all what Marbury said. The concept of judicial review is entirely distinct from the concept of a living document.

    It may not have been the intention of the founding fathers, but it is the reality that for most of America's history, the document has been living.
    Again, this is completely false. The very concept of the concept as a living document didn't even come into existence until around 80 years ago.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  2. #22
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by OxymoronP View Post
    The founding fathers understood that the constitution would be and should be able to flex. It is the judges responsiblity to understand the spirit of the law and define it based on the situation.
    Completely true. Hamilton said it best:
    Constitutions should consist only of general provisions; the reason is that they must necessarily be permanent, and that they cannot calculate for the possible change of things.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  3. #23
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Completely true. Hamilton said it best:
    I think that quote is actually saying the exact opposite: His point is that the Constitution is by its nature permanent and inflexible, so it should be drafted broadly so as to allow a wide range of laws to fit within its scope. It's precisely because the meaning of the Constitution does not change to fit the contemporary views of society that it should consist of general provisions.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #24
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I think that quote is actually saying the exact opposite: His point is that the Constitution is by its nature permanent and inflexible, so it should be drafted broadly so as to allow a wide range of laws to fit within its scope. It's precisely because the meaning of the Constitution does not change to fit the contemporary views of society that it should consist of general provisions.
    No, the opposite is true. What the quote represents is Hamilton's position that the Constitution should only have in it general provisions. Since society changes, these general provisions can be used to interpret the changing societial needs.
    Last edited by CaptainCourtesy; 03-07-10 at 05:11 AM.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  5. #25
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    No, the opposite is true. What the quote represents is Hamilton's position that the Constitution should only have in it general provisions. Since society changes, these general provisions can be used to interpret the changing societial needs.
    What it means is that a constitution must not be ultra specific.

    Like it saying a right to free speech instead of speech by word of mouth or a printing press.
    The right to bear arms instead of the right to bear flintlock muskets and bladed weapons.

    It's provisions cover future technological developments and thus there is no need to update those specific sections, for the most part.

    A constitution that is not grounded, is nothing at all.
    If it is so flexible, who is to decide when and where that flexibility it can apply?
    Can free speech be clamped down on because a person in power thinks society shouldn't have that wide option?

    I do not think you should enable someone to smudge your contractual assets and you get nothing in return.
    It's a bad deal for you and a good deal for them.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  6. #26
    Banned

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    07-11-11 @ 02:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,249

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    No, the opposite is true. What the quote represents is Hamilton's position that the Constitution should only have in it general provisions. Since society changes, these general provisions can be used to interpret the changing societial needs.
    I thought this point was already provided for, and I am asking, were they not called amendments? Again, pardon my ignorance, but I thought that so called "societal changes" were one of the reasons the founders (plural) framed it this way.

    Forgive me for ducking out for a while. I've got to go make a patrol of the Badlands.
    Last edited by Sir Loin; 03-07-10 at 05:29 AM.

  7. #27
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    No, the opposite is true. What the quote represents is Hamilton's position that the Constitution should only have in it general provisions. Since society changes, these general provisions can be used to interpret the changing societial needs.
    It's not really possible to add much context to the phrase since I can't find any evidence that that's actually an original Hamilton quote, but I stand by my original statement. He's not saying that the general provisions of the Constitution should be used to reflect changing societal needs, except in that their generality allows the legislature to pass laws that reflect contemporary views. He explicitly notes that Constitutions are permanent and by proxy not subject to reinterpretation. Think about it - if the Constitution could just be reinterpreted to reflect the values of the times, then why would it matter whether it was drafted narrowly or broadly? The only way that his recommendation makes any sense is if the meaning of the Constitution is fixed.

    In Hamilton's mind, the purpose of the Constitution was to lay out a broad set of rules defining some fundamental rights and procedures. For everything else, we would have to look to the legislature.
    Last edited by RightinNYC; 03-07-10 at 05:30 AM.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  8. #28
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    What it means is that a constitution must not be ultra specific.
    True.

    Like it saying a right to free speech instead of speech by word of mouth or a printing press or the right to bear arms instead of the right to bear flintlock muskets and bladed weapons.
    Exactly. That way when future advances occur or society progresses in different ways, the Constitution still applies and is still used without fail.

    It's provisions cover future technological developments and thus there is no need to update those specific sections, for the most part.
    Correct... but add future societal changes, too.

    A constitution that is not grounded, is nothing at all.
    If it is so flexible, who is to decide when and where that flexibility it can apply?
    Can free speech be clamped down on because a person in power thinks society shouldn't have that wide option?
    There is a difference between flexibility/interpretation based on current societal/technological conditions and disregard for the essence of what has been written.

    I do not think you should enable someone to smudge your contractual assets and you get nothing in return.
    It's a bad deal for you and a good deal for them.
    If money is shown to be irrelevant, then it hurts no one.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  9. #29
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Correct... but add future societal changes, too.
    I agree but for the most part our constitution doesn't deal with social issues at all.
    They are supposed to be freely decided by individuals.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    There is a difference between flexibility/interpretation based on current societal/technological conditions and disregard for the essence of what has been written.
    I understand but one flexibility leads to another and then another.
    Finally you are so far away from an original intent that you might as well had thrown it out in the first place.

    I look to things like Australia and some parts of Europe that supposedly value free speech highly but then they try to censor the internet and what they determine to be hate speech.
    What's next I wonder?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    If money is shown to be irrelevant, then it hurts no one.
    True but this has yet to be proven with respect to rights.
    We may be far from our past as far as technology goes but we are not far away from despotic human desires that have plagued the world prior to the creation of the U.S.

    I keep that in mind and guard what is mine fervently.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  10. #30
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: Obama 9th Circuit Nominee: Constitution Must Adapt to Changes in the World

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    It's not really possible to add much context to the phrase since I can't find any evidence that that's actually an original Hamilton quote, but I stand by my original statement. He's not saying that the general provisions of the Constitution should be used to reflect changing societal needs, except in that their generality allows the legislature to pass laws that reflect contemporary views. He explicitly notes that Constitutions are permanent and by proxy not subject to reinterpretation. Think about it - if the Constitution could just be reinterpreted to reflect the values of the times, then why would it matter whether it was drafted narrowly or broadly? The only way that his recommendation makes any sense is if the meaning of the Constitution is fixed.

    In Hamilton's mind, the purpose of the Constitution was to lay out a broad set of rules defining some fundamental rights and procedures. For everything else, we would have to look to the legislature.
    And I, too, stand by my original statement. If the Constitution was narrowly drafted, the document would need to be revised fairly often to reflect societal and technological changes, thus contradicting his statement that they would need to be permanent. Hamilton's idea was that the Constitution would be a broadly drafted document that could pertain to most current and future situations with permanence. Broad drafting is the only way his statement makes sense. Considering we have had 220+ years of use out of the document, and society has gone through VAST changes during that time, I'd say the broad interpretation has served us well.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •