• 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!

The constitution is stupid

theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should ask your teacher...some questions, so that she could explain it to you on your level.
 
theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...

Rule of law.


Learn it.
 
theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...

I see under your site name it says that you're from "Finland". Are you sure you aren't from Alabama and your true name is really Moore? :lol:

But I must say, you do have an amusing perception of Constitutions...etc.

Uh, wait! You think holy scriptures were "sculpted by God himself?"
 
theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...


We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, 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.
Click to expand...


The preamble to the US Constitution lays out the fact that the people are sovereign. Until then those words - that very idea - had never been spoken. That was a sea change in governance. Say what you want but the United States Constitution and the government it laid out was a radical departure from everything that preceded it.
 
X Factor said:
I’d argue with the OP but, as I am a theist, I’m a little concerned about how literally to take his username.
Click to expand...

Ah c'mon you're not afraid of Internet tough guys are ya? :)
 
theisthanger556 said:
To assume that a writing from 200+ years ago would stop a government, with fighter jets, tanks, massive militaries is surely stupid. There isn't some kind of a God of Constitutions who stops Govts from breaking rules in the constitution.

I have no problems with the govt limiting it's own power, my point was that the govt shouldn't tie basic freedoms to paper.
Click to expand...
To the contrary, it is precisely because there is a Constitution that governments, with all their power, are still subjected to the will of the people and not the other way around. That document provides sufficient checks and balances to ensure that despite transition of leadership, we do not devolve into a monarchy. You call it a 'piece of paper'...but thatsjust what it was written on. It isnt just a piece of paper...it is the entire form and structure of our government.
 
theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...

These men were considerably more intelligent than you, I'm not so sure they were more intelligent than me.

Words have power when people believe in them.

The constitution is a pretty clever framework for government. Some of the later alterations have been crap, Ill admit. The proof is in the pudding however, and this is why we didn't hook up with Hitler as you people did.

The Declaration of Independence is our defining document however.
 
theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...

You're either very ignorant on US policies, a 13 year old who hasn't been taught American history, or trolling. The reason why it is written in the first place is to serve as a contract between the people and the government.
 
theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...



First bold.

Your ignorance is overwhelming. "Nothing special" may or may not be true, however every nation that has ever existed has a body of laws; even the most remote tribes in the Asian southeast have "customs" by which they live. Most parliamentary systems have either"common law" laws based on tradition; Britain has 800 years of common law tradition, France has The Napoleonic code.

So, no, in terms of have a list of laws, you are partially right, the constitution is not alone in the world, nor even close to being the first.

Second bold:

"no different than Mien Kampf".....

Again I am embarrassed at your ignorance. One, Mien Kampf is a manifesto, a declaration and has more in common with the declaration of independence than laws. The Communist Manifesto is exactly that, a manifesto - "a published and/or declared intentions, actions or views. The only thing it shares with the constitution is that they were both highly controversial.

"Atlas Shrugged" is none of the above, but rather a work of fiction, a novel, by a Russian emigre whose "ideas" have been debunked again and again.

Third bold.

First there is no such word as idiocratic. If you intended the word "idiosyncratic" you are contending that the United States constitution is "distinctive", "individual", "individualistic", "characteristic", "peculiar", "typical", "special", "specific", "unique", "one-of-a-kind", "personal". Which is obviously horse****. The US constitution is neither the first such document, nor "peculiar" in any way; there are hundreds of national constitutions, some of them based on and/improved on the US model.

But note, you begin saying there is "nothing special" and close indicating it's "unique".


Finally, you are referencing the right to bear arms I assume, while attacking the constitution. The only problem is that the right to bear arms is not in the United States Constitution, but rather contained in the 'bill of rights"

I would suggest doing some research, especially a document called "the preamble to the constitution" it kind of answers all your stupid questions
 
theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...

Well, it should be the Bible, but since everyone can't agree on WHICH bible, it's the next best thing.
It's actually not a stupid question to raise, and those that admonish you for asking it are being overly harsh.
Sure, it's just paper, but it's the source of what we can all agree to aspire to; as Lincoln said, part of "the better angels of our nature."
 
theisthanger556 said:
Seriously, why do we need to attach free speech into some word written by men no different than us?

Why can't we just have guns, why do we need specifically to say that "we can have guns" on some piece of paper.

The constitution has no value, it is just words written by man, it has no objective basis, it isn't some holy scripture, sculpted by God himself.

The constitution has no power, there is nothing special about it, it is just the thoughts of some men about how the country should be organized and what liberties should there be, no different from Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Atlas Shrugged or any other political writing. The constution is just a piece of paper, it's power is non-existant, and to do/not do something because of an old writing is idiocratic.
Click to expand...

There is much wrong with this post it deserves to go in file 13 and have a stupid meme in response.bozone.jpg
 
soylentgreen said:
That still does not answer as to why a constitution.

But to be a little more specific than the OP which i disagree with. Your statement does not answer, why a written constitution that locks society into a view held ever 200 years ago.
Click to expand...

I do understand your point, and so did those who wrote the document. That's why they included Article V and the mechanism for future generations to amend the document.

The biggest problem with government is that we have not honored the Constitution. That is not a reflection on the document itself, but rather on the humans who hold office. Just in the last 15 years the men in government nullified 2 important parts of the document, and few people are even aware of that, much less voice objections.
 
Thoreau72 said:
I do understand your point, and so did those who wrote the document. That's why they included Article V and the mechanism for future generations to amend the document.

The biggest problem with government is that we have not honored the Constitution. That is not a reflection on the document itself, but rather on the humans who hold office. Just in the last 15 years the men in government nullified 2 important parts of the document, and few people are even aware of that, much less voice objections.
Click to expand...

Article V is a joke. Like building skynet without an off switch. You also created a style of governance that is always in conflict with itself. It would be near impossible to get the majority votes needed when the style of government is always antagonistic.

America has created a nasty trap for itself. You need to change the constitution so as to make changes in the style of governance. But your style of governance is such that no agreement can be reached to make the changes in the constitution.

Both NZ and england have no written constitution for a similar reason. The english already have the magna carte and the nz have the treaty of waitangi. America should join us by putting the constitution in a museum where it belongs and begin again with an unwritten constitution.
 
sangha said:
When it comes to our govt, the people ARE the authority...the ULTIMATE authority
Click to expand...

Snigger! Which country are you talking about? Certainly not america. You have corrupt politicians bought and sold by corporations and lobby groups whose financial influence dictate how those politicians will vote. The people are only given the idea that they rule through even more of a corrupt voting system.

Let's talk about reality and who really controls america which is not the people.
 
soylentgreen said:
Snigger! Which country are you talking about? Certainly not america. You have corrupt politicians bought and sold by corporations and lobby groups whose financial influence dictate how those politicians will vote. The people are only given the idea that they rule through even more of a corrupt voting system.

Let's talk about reality and who really controls america which is not the people.
Click to expand...

I am not interested in your conspiracy theories. We have an entire forum for that. Feel free to post them there, where I can ignore them
 
soylentgreen said:
Article V is a joke. Like building skynet without an off switch. You also created a style of governance that is always in conflict with itself. It would be near impossible to get the majority votes needed when the style of government is always antagonistic.

America has created a nasty trap for itself. You need to change the constitution so as to make changes in the style of governance. But your style of governance is such that no agreement can be reached to make the changes in the constitution.

Both NZ and england have no written constitution for a similar reason. The english already have the magna carte and the nz have the treaty of waitangi. America should join us by putting the constitution in a museum where it belongs and begin again with an unwritten constitution.
Click to expand...

We've changed the Constitution 23 (excluding the first 10 amendments - the Bill of Rights). That an average of once every 10 years more or less. Amending a system of governance SHOULD be hard. We actually do it more often than I'd like.
 
sangha said:
I am not interested in your conspiracy theories. We have an entire forum for that. Feel free to post them there, where I can ignore them
Click to expand...

You mean your not interested in reality. Instead just hold to a dream that the people have the power in your corrupt little regime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom