View Poll Results: DO GOP BELIEVE IN THE U.S.CONSTITUTION ?

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

    7 8.54%
  • No

    46 56.10%
  • Sometimes

    29 35.37%
  • Don't care.

    1 1.22%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

  1. #21
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,136

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    Well grouping all of the GOP is silly because many of them believe different things
    Look at the gay rights issue, millions of them support it and reference the constitution while many also don't

    so they cant be grouped together

    but in general many people (no matter party), treat the constitution like they do religion or own self morals. "I like what is on this page or in this right or passage etc and I dont like this one, or I dont like it applied to people i dont like etc and they pick and choose.

    Basically this below:


    and this will always continue . . . .
    yep, pretty much. none of us are completely innocent of doing this, including me.

  2. #22
    Curmudgeon


    LowDown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,572
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    Unconstitutional Procedure Being Used to Pass Unconstitutional ObamaCare - Breitbart

    The Right Strikes Back: A New Legal Challenge for Obamacare

    Say, doesn’t the Constitution require tax bills to originate in the House? « Hot Air

    Constitution Be Damned - ObamaCare Vote Next Week | RedState

    I could go through many more Conservative commentary on the unconstitutionality of using the reconciliation process, not to mention the second link is conservative groups challenging the law in court based on reconciliation.

    What Hillary Clinton's email fail tells us: Cybersecurity begins at home | Fox News

    I could find more on Hillary as well but this article starts with "constitutionality aside..."

    As for the second part....sure! There's no doubt that's the case. There's also no doubt there are avenues Congress can use to challenge the agreement through the legislative process (though post letter I doubt any Dems will play ball). That hasn't stopped the typical unconstitutional yells from the right though.
    You are confusing reconciliation with the fact that spending bills have to originate in the House. Reconciliation is a means to pass budget bills in the Senate without a 60 vote margin. That's a matter of Senate rules, not the Constitution.

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --HL Mencken

  3. #23
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,234

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    Quote Originally Posted by CMPancake View Post
    It's pretty common place for just abotu anyone to ignore the Constitution when it is a detriment and preach it when it suits their political ends.
    You beat me to it.
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  4. #24
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,835

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    yep, pretty much. none of us are completely innocent of doing this, including me.
    I agree, I can't think of a topic Ive done it on but Im sure I have or at least minimum, I dont fight as equally hard against things I feel violate the constitution. A good example would be my concealed weapons permit.
    Im totally for gun rights and Ill freely admit that by the constitution that shouldn't be a restriction but as along as its easy like mine was i dont really get and all frazzled by it.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  5. #25
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    I must politely disagree. Consider the Sedition Act of 1789:

    "SECTION II. Punishes seditious writings.
    1. Definition of offence:
    To write, print, utter or publish, or cause it to be done, or assist in it, any false, scandalous, and malicious writing against the government of the United States, or either House of Congress, or the President, with intent to defame, or bring either into contempt or disrepute, or to excite against either the hatred of the people of the United States, or to stir up sedition, or to excite unlawful combinations against the government, or to resist it, or to aid or encourage hostile designs of foreign nations.
    2. Grade of offence:
    A misdemeanour.
    3. Punishment:
    Fine not exceeding $2000, and imprisonment not exceeding two years.


    Can you imagine the outrage if this was passed today? People would be screaming about the violation of freedom of speech. And yet, this was passed shortly after the Constitution was ratified.



    The Constitution was written at the Constitutional Convention. There were 30-40 people attending daily, for almost 4 months. It also had to be ratified by the entire nation, a process that required descriptions in the Federalist Papers.

    Madison was the primary author of the Bill of Rights. However, those amendments had to be ratified by the entire nation. We also have no idea what Madison would genuinely say about the modern world

    So, whose understanding matter here? Is it only the people who wrote it? The people who ratified it? The judges and public today?

    And how easy is it, really, to apply 200+ year old Constitutional provisions to the modern world? Just the other day, Jeb Bush thought it was crazy to apply a 1936 communications law to the Internet -- yet presumably, he has no problems applying principles crafted 1787. Seems a bit selective to me.
    Again, I agree and a lot of what you say is accurate. However, as to the bolded part, that's where the kludge of the living document BS comes in. The Constitution was set up to require generational maintenance. That's what the amendment process is all about. We, as a nation, failed to do our due diligence in keeping step between the Constitution and changing times. Instead we allowed the SCOTUS to take the power to shortcut the process and make the changes themselves through re-interpretation.

  6. #26
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:28 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,020

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Again, I agree and a lot of what you say is accurate. However, as to the bolded part, that's where the kludge of the living document BS comes in. The Constitution was set up to require generational maintenance. That's what the amendment process is all about.
    First, the structure of the amendment process belies this claim. It is not an easy process, it is significantly harder to amend the Constitution in the US than in most other nations, it's become more difficult as we've added states, and we haven't done anything to make it any easier. In addition, some people today treat every vowel and comma of the Constitution as sacrosanct. This has made modifications even more difficult.

    Second, it's very clear that the Constitution was not fixed in stone from the start. The first generations of politicians, especially Washington, knew that their choices would have a major impact on how the nation's political structure and balance of powers would play out. The Framers knew it shouldn't be as specific as statutory law. Jefferson even tossed off a comment about replacing it once a generation.

    Third, whining doesn't answer the critical questions.
    • WHOSE intent do we follow? The author, the legislators, the ratifiers, the citizens? The citizens whose lives will actually be influenced by the interpretations?

    • What happens when the intent was actually divided? E.g. many early post-colonial politicians didn't want a standing army at all, while some did. Whose intent is binding?

    • We have absolutely no idea how any of those politicians would react to modern times. E.g. imagining that we know how Jefferson would react to desegregation, let alone the Internet, beggars belief.

    • What happens when our ethical concepts change? The Constitution outlaws "cruel and unusual punishment." Are we supposed to hew to the 18th century concepts about punishment? Washington whipped deserters from the Revolutionary Army, with minimal due process; does that mean flogging is back on the table as a valid punishment?

    More to the point is that there is no one, single, absolutely accurate interpretation of the Constitution. It doesn't happen. It can't happen. The nature of language, law and politics makes it impossible. Every law and every court decision will rely on an act of interpretation. Even claiming you're following exactly what the Framers intended requires an act of interpreting their intentions.

    Nor is that particularly new. In English Common Law, judges routinely needed to rely on precedent, and determine how to apply older laws to new situations. What has changed isn't the process, it is our awareness of the interpretive elements of that process.


    We, as a nation, failed to do our due diligence in keeping step between the Constitution and changing times. Instead we allowed the SCOTUS to take the power to shortcut the process and make the changes themselves through re-interpretation.
    There is little reason to doubt the validity of judicial review. The concept was utilized prior to the ratification of the US Constitution. It was solidified in the US in 1803 with Marbury v Madison -- years in which Jefferson, Madison, Adams, John Jay, even Thomas Paine were still alive and active. Even those who disliked it (such as Jefferson) took few, if any, steps to stop it. There was really no doubt after 1803 that the SCOTUS had taken on this role.

    We've also had over 200 years to amend the Constitution and change this system. We didn't. You wanna change it? You know what to do.

    And pertinent to the question posed in this thread: People tend to bitch about the judiciary a lot more after a loss than after a victory. I don't recall a lot of pro-gun advocates decrying judicial activism, or judicial review, in the wake of Heller....

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    How the hell would I - or anyone - know what EVERY, single GOP loyalist believes in?

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    06-27-15 @ 05:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    2,191

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    These threads are absolutely amazing in their all around assumptions that all Americans even care about the constitution or ever did to begin with. It's an old document from a bygone time. Assumptions are dangerous things.



    Consider it's a document that was created by slave owners who didn't want women to ever be able to vote nor people who didn't own land.




    I actually very much like the US constitution but it does scare me just how assumptive your average constitution supporter is in regards to the average American.

  9. #29
    Guru
    Smeagol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 11:35 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,147

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    Quote Originally Posted by oncewas View Post
    Do the GOP Conservative believe in the Constitution only when it suit their agenda,or for what the Constitution really means? Do the GOP think the founding Fathers got it wrong when they wrote the U.S.Constitution ?3
    You can't put everyone in the same box but I've found that often partisan types tend to define what's right and wrong based on their party's agenda first and foremost. I'm sure there are exceptions but they probably claim to support the constitution and honestly believe they do but only after they've interpreted the constitution to line up with their party.
    Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011

  10. #30
    Sage
    Oozlefinch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    State of Jefferson
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    11,370

    Re: Does the GOP Conservative,really believe in the U.S.Constitution ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    You can't put everyone in the same box but I've found that often partisan types tend to define what's right and wrong based on their party's agenda first and foremost. I'm sure there are exceptions but they probably claim to support the constitution and honestly believe they do but only after they've interpreted the constitution to line up with their party.
    I am highlighting something really important in your post.

    Most Republicans (as are Most Democrats) are not political partisans. They tend to be more moderate, tending to agree with their party of choice but not having a real strong attachment to it, and may even cross over if the right issue or candidate comes along (look at Reagan Democrats for a classic example).

    The problem with the far sides both Left and Right is that they all to often tend to dominate the discussion. More moderate people are often willing to make concessions and find a neutral ground, while the partisans want an "all or nothing" approach, and anybody who does not agree should be burned at the stake.
    War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. - John Stuart Mill

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •