View Poll Results: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

Voters
84. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes.

    51 60.71%
  • No.

    33 39.29%
Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 174

Thread: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    YES, I am a Constitutional Literalist. I always have been and always will be.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aderleth View Post
    Anyone who claims to be a literal constitutionalist is either lying or delusional.
    Ok, so which am I, Aderleth? I am a strong proponent of not only a literal reading of the document, but a removal of most of the amendments after the Bill of Rights.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    The problem is, most people are ignorant and we all know that actually amending the Constitution is virtually impossible. There are a lot of things that, while they may have been applicable 240 years ago, simply make little sense today and don't apply to the modern world. As time goes on, the Constitution will continue to become less and less relevant.
    If it becomes irrelevant enough then it will either be amended, rewritten, or we'll have a revolution and form a new government.... You know, like the Founders intended.

  4. #14
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,803

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    If it becomes irrelevant enough then it will either be amended, rewritten, or we'll have a revolution and form a new government.... You know, like the Founders intended.
    Or, like in so many cases today, it's just ignored. Most people are sheep and just don't care.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  5. #15
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,445

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    Ok, so which am I, Aderleth?
    Let's check the Relationship section.

  6. #16
    Devourer of Poor Children
    DrunkenAsparagus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    DC
    Last Seen
    01-20-16 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,496

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    I think that we should interpret the Constitution to be pretty close to the original or literal meaning. There is some leeway, and if we interpreted everything literally, there are still somethings that have multiple meanings. I think that laws should be consistent with what the amendment is trying to do. There is still some subjectivity. That will never be eliminated from jurisprudence, or else judges wouldn't be necessary. However, I feel that a lot of people use the constitution to support rights that don't appear anywhere in the document, use meanings that almost no one applies, or blatantly contradict what the text says. Interpretation is important. For instance, Moby Dick is not just about some guy who is pissed off at a whale, but it's also not about something like women's rights or how to drive a car. This is not to say that the law is as open to interpretation as a fictional work. The law has some room for interpretation like literature, but the entire concept of the rule of law is based upon clear rules. The law has some leeway, but if the Founders wanted the government to be able to pass any statute it wanted, they could have simply copied the UK. The constitution there simply consists of whatever statutes are on the book. The Founders chose not to.
    "Doubleplusungood"

    George Orwell

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Or, like in so many cases today, it's just ignored. Most people are sheep and just don't care.
    Then maybe those of us who do care just need to be a little more "forceful" in our push to get things back on track. The Tea Partiers CLAIMED they were going to start changing the system, but I've heard little out of them about that in the last six months.

  8. #18
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    Not a literalist, but I am an originalist. A literalist will usually not agree with minor tests on basic rights whereas an originalist usually subscribes to the necessary and proper clause. I do not usually entertain "because we can" or "because we need it" arguments without proper also being part of the equation.

    For instance:
    Certain bans on speech that aren't found in literalism but do fall under necessary and proper;
    Libel/Defamation law- we cannot damage the reputation of our fellow citizens, truth is a defense, but it is nearly impossible to regain your standing in society after a nasty character attack. Lying about others character is thus protected literally but not under a necessary and proper interpretation.
    Incitement to riot, fighting words, other words intended to create violence- Really not much needs to be said here, we do not have the right to infringe upon other's rights so obviously we cannot as a society to allow excessively violent speech to risk harm to others.
    Porn/Obscenity law- Under VERY specific circumstances. For instance cursing in public is not the best usage of speech but I firmly believe it should be protected, some locations and courts disagree. Public broadcasters I believe shouldn't be allowed obscene content uncensored only because of the access to children, however paid programming should be exempt.

    Gun Control:
    The founders were very clear that the right to keep and bear is not to be infringed. This is not therefore an issue that should not be confusing unless confusion is the intent. That being said.
    Auto-Weapon bans - these are absurd, I have no problem with a simple licensing and testing compromise. The current law regarding these weapons is not necessary or proper, convoluted, and thus needs to be simplified.
    General gun bans- Are not necessary or proper and should be struck down.
    Conceal Carry Law- In general I have no problem with this, however some states make the permit process nearly impossible and should simplify.

    The ninth and tenth amendments:
    Should be restored fully in prominence to reign in the federal government encroachment on state's rights, this would solve thousands if not millions of problems on the local, state, and federal level.

    So no, very few people including myself are literalists for various reasons.
    Last edited by LaMidRighter; 12-07-11 at 03:02 PM.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  9. #19
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,803

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    Then maybe those of us who do care just need to be a little more "forceful" in our push to get things back on track. The Tea Partiers CLAIMED they were going to start changing the system, but I've heard little out of them about that in the last six months.
    The problem is, there aren't enough of us who care to make a difference. The Tea Party is a minuscule minority. We need a majority of Americans to care and that's just not going to happen.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  10. #20
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,445

    Re: Are you a Literal Constitutionalist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    Then maybe those of us who do care just need to be a little more "forceful" in our push to get things back on track.
    Coming from a woman-beater, that is rich.

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/dating...hit-first.html

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/dating...ou-please.html
    Last edited by ecofarm; 12-07-11 at 03:36 PM.

Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 123412 ... 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
  •