View Poll Results: What should be done with the Founders' ideas?

Voters
71. You may not vote on this poll
  • We should build upon them, but not completely transform them.

    50 70.42%
  • They need to be fundamentally transformed.

    6 8.45%
  • They're dead. Who cares what they thought?

    7 9.86%
  • Other (please elaborate)

    8 11.27%
Page 9 of 31 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 310

Thread: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

  1. #81
    Professor
    Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pocono Mountains, PA
    Last Seen
    05-24-11 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,363

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    Because you're missing the point. This isn't about amending the Constitution, and the Constitution hasn't been amended in any way to address this issue.
    No, I would say that you're missing the point.

    YOU consider it a usurping of the Constitution because you disagree with the interpretation. However, this change came about through absolutely legal and Constitutional means -- through Supreme Court decisions made by justices who were appointed through a very specific format according to the very Constitution.

    Just because you personally disagree with it doesn't make it invalid. There are many decisions the court has made that I disagree with too, but I don't claim that therefore our government has been usurped.

  2. #82
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Because it didn't need to be. Amending the Constitution is, for the most part, unnecessary. Most everything that we need, even as a modern society is there. All that needs to occur is for what is written to be interpreted and applied to current situations. Pretty easy to do, and it has been done for more than two centuries. If this wasn't the case, we would have to throw out and rewrite the Constitution every 50 years or so. Why, when this amazing document is fully adequate. This is also why, as Hamilton said, the language was kept general and not specific. So it WOULD apply to future generations.
    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
    No, I would say that you're missing the point.

    YOU consider it a usurping of the Constitution because you disagree with the interpretation. However, this change came about through absolutely legal and Constitutional means -- through Supreme Court decisions made by justices who were appointed through a very specific format according to the very Constitution.

    Just because you personally disagree with it doesn't make it invalid. There are many decisions the court has made that I disagree with too, but I don't claim that therefore our government has been usurped.
    You are both missing the point, and/or not following the flow of the conversation.

    SM just pointed out that the way the Constitution is interpreted now is not the way Madison and Hamilton had intended it to be interpreted. Groucho responded by saying:
    "How can it be usurpation if we, the people, using the process provided by the Constitution, have changed it?"

    And yet, as neither of you dispute, it hasn't been changed in such a way. Thus both comments that followed either didn't realize what they were defending, or were defending a post you already knew to be incorrect by ignoring the point. And in Groucho's case, putting words in my mouth (I never said anything was an "usurpation", that was SM).

    All that having been said- CC is right, the founders intended the Constitution to be interpretable to apply to new circumstances. But if the issue SM was talking about had already been noted by Hamilton and Madison, then there is nothing new about it, and to ignore their view is to ignore the intent of the founders. You might as well "interpret" the First Amendment to say that nobody has any freedom of speech, and because it's an "interpretation" the intent of the founders doesn't matter.

  3. #83
    blond bombshell

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    uk
    Last Seen
    10-19-12 @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,729

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by 1069 View Post
    That might've been me, except that I said they were misogynistic slave-owners (ie, products of their time) so who cares what they thought.
    Which was a rhetorical question, by the way, because I know who cares: lots of people.
    But I don't.
    The constitution is of no more interest or relevance to me than the bible.
    Ancient documents written by savages, who wouldn't have considered me- or the black family next door- human, or deserving of the same rights they so generously afforded themselves.
    well that suggest you can call a better alternative of people.
    The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.

  4. #84
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
    Even Jefferson stated at the time that he thought the Constitution would need to be rewritten every 20 years or so to take into consideration a changing society.

    I disagree with him, of course, as do many other Founding Fathers -- which just goes to show that you can't rely upon the FF to solve every Constitutional question, because even they disagreed.
    And Jefferson wrote no part of the Constitution at all. Whereas Madison and Hamilton had a huge role in writing it.
    Thus, using common legal standards as well as simple logic, Madison and Hamilton's words matter immensely when interpreting the Constitution, whereas Jefferson's words hardly matter at all.

  5. #85
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by Mellie View Post
    I saw someone on here the other day say that the Founders are dead so who cares what they thought.

    What are your opinions on the Founders' ideas and what we should be doing with them (if anything at all)?
    I put that we should build upon them - but, that is, of course, open to much interpretation.

    It's not like the Founding Fathers had the internet, a concept of a "gay identity", women owning property, blacks owning property...

    I think the point is that - as Founding Fathers - they merely laid a foundation. It's up to us to make sure that as we keep building, we don't strain the foundation.

    That said, what some people consider a strain (or transformation) others believe to be a continuation of their ideals.

  6. #86
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,692

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Let me show you how you missed the point, Dav:



    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    SM just pointed out that the way the Constitution is interpreted now is not the way Madison and Hamilton had intended it to be interpreted. Groucho responded by saying:

    All that having been said- CC is right, the founders intended the Constitution to be interpretable to apply to new circumstances.
    These two statements are NOT contradictory, though you are posting as if they are. These two statement are actually COMPLIMENTARY. I am arguing that the way that the Constitution is being interpreted may not be the way that Madison and Hamilton intended, but that is irrelevant since the founders (which include Madison and Hamilton) intended the Constitution to be interpretable to apply to new circumstances. See how both live well in conjunction?
    "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"

  7. #87
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,692

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    And Jefferson wrote no part of the Constitution at all. Whereas Madison and Hamilton had a huge role in writing it.
    Thus, using common legal standards as well as simple logic, Madison and Hamilton's words matter immensely when interpreting the Constitution, whereas Jefferson's words hardly matter at all.
    I agree. And I will bookmark this post.
    "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"

  8. #88
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    These two statements are NOT contradictory, though you are posting as if they are. These two statement are actually COMPLIMENTARY. I am arguing that the way that the Constitution is being interpreted may not be the way that Madison and Hamilton intended, but that is irrelevant since the founders (which include Madison and Hamilton) intended the Constitution to be interpretable to apply to new circumstances. See how both live well in conjunction?
    Not really sure what you're talking about. Airplanes are a new circumstance; hence, the constitutionality of the air force. The Constitutional limit on Federal spending is not a new circumstance. It is a timeless circumstance, and Hamilton and Madison both wrote about it, and thus both of their views on it are vital to how it's interpreted. The confusing thing is that below, you seem to agree with this.


    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I agree. And I will bookmark this post.
    You can bookmark posts?

  9. #89
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,692

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    Not really sure what you're talking about. Airplanes are a new circumstance; hence, the constitutionality of the air force. The Constitutional limit on Federal spending is not a new circumstance. It is a timeless circumstance, and Hamilton and Madison both wrote about it, and thus both of their views on it are vital to how it's interpreted. The confusing thing is that below, you seem to agree with this.
    I agree that their interpretation is important, but I also agree that they understood the importance of re-interpretation based on societal changes. What you seem to be saying is that their interpretation TRUMPS others, while at the same time asserting that they understood the need for re-interpretation. Do you see how you are contradicting yourself?

    You can bookmark posts?
    With Firefox. I bookmark lots of posts for "future reference".
    "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"

  10. #90
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Our Founding Fathers' Ideas

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I agree that their interpretation is important, but I also agree that they understood the importance of re-interpretation based on societal changes. What you seem to be saying is that their interpretation TRUMPS others, while at the same time asserting that they understood the need for re-interpretation. Do you see how you are contradicting yourself?
    It's not a contradiction. Yes, their interpretation trumps all others. But for new circumstances like the one I mentioned, they had no interpretation (that's why it's a new circumstance), and thus a new one must be formed. Basically, if the intent is unclear or unstated, such as when an issue is new, then interpretation is up for grabs. Otherwise, original intent trumps all.

Page 9 of 31 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... 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
  •