• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Constitutional Convention Preamble[W:425]

US Conservative

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 11, 2013
Messages
33,522
Reaction score
10,826
Location
Between Athens and Jerusalem
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Please contribute your ideas to the Debate Politics Constitutional Preamble. Preamble=an introductory statement; preface; introduction.


Preamble
The Preamble to the Constitution is an introductory, succinct statement of the principles at work in the full text. It is referred to in countless speeches, judicial opinions, and in a song from Schoolhouse Rock. Courts will not interpret the Preamble to confer any rights or powers not granted specifically in the Constitution.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America[Debate Politics Forum] .

Preamble | Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

constitution-preamble-quill-pen.jpg


I feel the preamble to COTUS is actually a fine starting point to our DP constitution. It is brief but covers the important points, and I think that adopting it into our own DP constitution is a good idea. Another benefit, is that its existing structure will expedite the processes to the DP constitution.

There are assumptions made in adopting this, clearly it would imply that a group of states be united as one nation, that we expect our govt to maintain domestic peace and common defense (so law enforcement/military at the very least) etc.

Perhaps there are some who agree or disagree with this if so make your opinions known!
 
Please contribute your ideas to the Debate Politics Constitutional Preamble. Preamble=an introductory statement; preface; introduction.




constitution-preamble-quill-pen.jpg


I feel the preamble to COTUS is actually a fine starting point to our DP constitution. It is brief but covers the important points, and I think that adopting it into our own DP constitution is a good idea. Another benefit, is that its existing structure will expedite the processes to the DP constitution.

There are assumptions made in adopting this, clearly it would imply that a group of states be united as one nation, that we expect our govt to maintain domestic peace and common defense (so law enforcement/military at the very least) etc.

Perhaps there are some who agree or disagree with this if so make your opinions known!

I agree that COTUS is a great place to start. However, I think it would be useful for us to establish a more clear understanding of what we want those phrases (ex "a more perfect union", "general welfare", etc) to mean in *our* constitution.
 
Please contribute your ideas

I think the Preamble is very good and presents the vision very well. I think it could be adequately translated in today's terms so that more people would be aware of what our government is designed to accomplish.

I think this is a translation that says the same thing but might generate more interest from the average citizen.

We the People of the United States, in order to form a better society, establish fairness under the law, insure peace among its citizens, provide for the national defense of our nation, promote a good life for all citizens, and secure liberty to ourselves and the future citizens, do establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
 
I agree that COTUS is a great place to start. However, I think it would be useful for us to establish a more clear understanding of what we want those phrases (ex "a more perfect union", "general welfare", etc) to mean in *our* constitution.

We should have a definitions section? I remember reading that THomas Jefferson was against the supreme court and we could avoid having an SC by putting a definition section in the constitution to avoid misinterpretations.
 
I think the Preamble is very good and presents the vision very well. I think it could be adequately translated in today's terms so that more people would be aware of what our government is designed to accomplish.

I think this is a translation that says the same thing but might generate more interest from the average citizen.

We the People of the United States, in order to form a better society, establish fairness under the law, insure peace among its citizens, provide for the national defense of our nation, promote a good life for all citizens, and secure liberty to ourselves and the future citizens, do establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I disagree with the translation. "Fairness" is a subjective and loaded term, so is "good".
 
We should have a definitions section? I remember reading that THomas Jefferson was against the supreme court and we could avoid having an SC by putting a definition section in the constitution to avoid misinterpretations.

Not a bad idea, in this threads OP I linked to a legal dictionary, we should use one to avoid amorphous terms like "fairness" and "good" that will be exploited. The Constitutions knew human nature (that there would be exploiters), and so do we so we should do all we can to keep things very clear.
 
They are more perfect than fair and good.

That's true. I guess my point is that, people and words being what they are, different people will use any opening to interpret text in a way that suits their purposes. The better (another subjective) the job we do in making ourselves clear, the better the text will be.
 
Agreed with others, before we get to the preamble should we discuss the general government style we want to go with? I would be concerned with a preamble as the originating point assuming someone puts in language that suggests that model. Thoughts?
 
People are bored. All official threads will be posted by Sangha. I think we need as many unofficial threads as possible. The more threads we have the more likely it is to catch someone's attention. Seeing the whole convention engaged also allows us to find talent from the participating members. This also gives us more opportunities to 'politic' and build alliances. Ideally I'd like to see 83 threads (one for each member).

Agreed with others, before we get to the preamble should we discuss the general government style we want to go with? I would be concerned with a preamble as the originating point assuming someone puts in language that suggests that model. Thoughts?
 
I think the Preamble is very good and presents the vision very well. I think it could be adequately translated in today's terms so that more people would be aware of what our government is designed to accomplish.

I think this is a translation that says the same thing but might generate more interest from the average citizen.

We the People of the United States, in order to form a better society, establish fairness under the law, insure peace among its citizens, provide for the national defense of our nation, promote a good life for all citizens, and secure liberty to ourselves and the future citizens, do establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


establish fairness ??

promote a good life for all citizens??
 
The most important words in the Preamble are the first three "We the People." And they are important specifically because they make a clean break with pretty much every other government in existence at the time. It is a government of the people - not aristocrats, not royalty. But the people. The rest lay out in general terms the what and the why of the matter. They aren't specific and they don't need to be and frankly in our preamble neither do we. Specifics are for later. We should concentrate on a general statement of what we're about and why and let that guide the discussion on the specifics.
 
Last edited:
Personally I think the current pre-amble should be retained on altered for a couple of reasons. Nothing in the current preamble is controversial. There is nothing in the current preamble that our new government would not do. The language is broad enough that most political philosophies can be encompassed, laws allowing us to not get hung up in argument before we even discuss anything mechanical. But the most important reason is because schoolhouse rock is no longer on TV which means there will be no one to make a nifty song to help schoolchildren remember the preamble for class.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/30OyU4O80i4?autoplay=1
 
WE, the people of the United States, in order to design a more model republic, initiate jurisprudence, indemnify national repose, allocate for everyday deterrent, advocate well-being to all, and affix the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do hereto enjoin and institute this Constitution for the United States of America.
 
WE, the people of the United States, in order to design a more model republic, initiate jurisprudence, indemnify national repose, allocate for everyday deterrent, advocate well-being to all, and affix the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do hereto enjoin and institute this Constitution for the United States of America.

This is my precisely my point, "a more model republic." Republic is a form of government. I have no issue with that being our model but some might and we should welcome the conversation on what model of government we would want.
 
establish fairness ??

promote a good life for all citizens??

Will this work?

We the People of the United States, in order to form a better society, establish Justice, insure peace among its citizens, provide for the national defense of our nation, promote the general Welfare, and secure liberty to ourselves and the future citizens, do establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
 
Will this work?

We the People of the United States, in order to form a better society, establish Justice, insure peace among its citizens, provide for the national defense of our nation, promote the general Welfare, and secure liberty to ourselves and the future citizens, do establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


things to think about?

is the government going to be national or federal, BECAUSE that is going to be monumental in determining, what government is going to be doing.

example: if its national then the preamble, can speak of doing things for the people on a personal level.

if its a federal government, then the preamble should speak of doing things for the people, on a national level only [for the union itself], such as protecting them from foreign threats, regulate foreign commerce, negotiation with foreign nations, be the arbitrator of problems among the states....... things which bind the union together only.

so before a preamble is even written, it most certainly is important to determine what kind of government its going to be......



another example: there is no point of creating delegated powers, ..if the government is national, and no point is creating state powers, if its federal .
 
We should have a definitions section? I remember reading that THomas Jefferson was against the supreme court and we could avoid having an SC by putting a definition section in the constitution to avoid misinterpretations.

I absolutely agree on that. That is one of the major problems of the current constitution.
 
The most important words in the Preamble are the first three "We the People." And they are important specifically because they make a clean break with pretty much every other government in existence at the time. It is a government of the people - not aristocrats, not royalty. But the people. The rest lay out in general terms the what and the why of the matter. They aren't specific and they don't need to be and frankly in our preamble neither do we. Specifics are for later. We should concentrate on a general statement of what we're about and why and let that guide the discussion on the specifics.

I would adjust the term slightly in the preamble to WE THE SOVERIEGN PEOPLE, I would also add toward the end this phase, "voluntarily lend a part of our sovereignty to establish this Constitution of the United States of America."
 
I absolutely agree on that. That is one of the major problems of the current constitution.

The problems of not having a strong Supreme Court exceed those of having one
 
We should have a definitions section? I remember reading that THomas Jefferson was against the supreme court and we could avoid having an SC by putting a definition section in the constitution to avoid misinterpretations.

the founders created 2 bulwarks, as a check on federal power, one being the senate controlled by the state legislatures, the other the court.

since the 17th destroyed the check by the state legislatures, allowing unconstitutional [non delegated powers] to be created by congress in the first place, only the second bulwark exist and it takes a great deal of time to hear the case, and the court is no longer free from political influence.
 
things to think about?

is the government going to be national or federal, BECAUSE that is going to be monumental in determining, what government is going to be doing.

example: if its national then the preamble, can speak of doing things for the people on a personal level.

if its a federal government, then the preamble should speak of doing things for the people, on a national level only [for the union itself], such as protecting them from foreign threats, regulate foreign commerce, negotiation with foreign nations, be the arbitrator of problems among the states....... things which bind the union together only.

so before a preamble is even written, it most certainly is important to determine what kind of government its going to be......



another example: there is no point of creating delegated powers, ..if the government is national, and no point is creating state powers, if its federal .

I say national.
 
Back
Top Bottom