The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: RuralNc on August 29, 2022, 08:22:28 PM
-
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217098551
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/framers-constitution-democracy/671155/
The Constitutional Flaw That’s Killing American Democracy
The Constitution doesn’t have to be something we merely inherit; it could be something we can change ourselves—starting with rewriting the too-stringent rules for making such changes.
Ok, so im not going to bring over the way over the top, wall of text. Mostly because the above sums it up. In short, as we all know, Dems. dont like the rules? Change them! Or in this case, propose that they be changed to fit their own whims.
That sums it up.
This is a new thread on a very tired idea. Im sure hilarity will ensue.
Irish_Dem (27,748 posts)
1. If our Constitution is not a living, breathing document that allows
for some flexibility, then we will not survive as a nation.
It was doing just dandy until you useless, free loading, bong hitting assholes started meddling in all affairs' of mankind.
-
A republic that wishes to remain a republic NEEDS anti-democratic limits.
The framers called them The Bill of Rights, and they MEANT every word of them.
NEOBuckeye (2,718 posts)
**** originalism
It’s so dumb that people like Amy Coney Barrett believe that laws made in the late 18th century should perfectly inform and govern our society today, 250 years and worlds of change later.
It isn't just ACB who thinks that, it's the majority of states that you DUmbasses can't convince bully or bribe to change those laws - those limits on government exercise of power - which form the bedrock of the free nation that you'd like to see turned into a collectivist third world shit hole
**** those who say "**** originalism".
-
starting with rewriting the too-stringent rules for making such changes.
"Too-stringent rules for making changes"...
You mean, "Not enough people agree with us about the changes we want to make".
-
America can not exist with leftist commie scrunts having any sway in America. ESAD and stay the Fock out of America's way you ignorant scrunts.
-
Oh. It was a Lawrence Tribe article. :yawn:
Didn't garner much excitement over there. Two DUmmies merely submitted " +1 " as a comment.
The DUmmies do this all the time. They think they can huddle in their little podunk website and do something so earthshaking as change the constitution. They made it hard for a reason, DUmbasses.
-
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/framers-constitution-democracy/671155/
The Constitutional Flaw That’s Killing American Democracy
The Constitution doesn’t have to be something we merely inherit; it could be something we can change ourselves—starting with rewriting the too-stringent rules for making such changes.
The USC's high bar for amendment is a feature. It hinders amendments that would impose ill-conceived social engineering and demagogues' wet dreams. Which are what The Atlantic seems to want imposed. The writers of the USC understood such an urge and made such destructive changes difficult.
-
it amuses me that "people" that can barely tie their shoes or button a shirt think that they know anything about what The Constitution has provided for the country.
-
NEOBuckeye (2,718 posts)
**** originalism
It’s so dumb that people like Amy Coney Barrett believe that laws made in the late 18th century should perfectly inform and govern our society today, 250 years and worlds of change later.
Technology has advanced in the past 250 years, but human nature is the same. Examples:
* The insane slaughter of WW1 battlefield and in WW2;
* Nazi concentration/death camps and Lenin/Stalin Gulags;
* Stalin's Holodomor.
These were all enabled by then-modern weaponry and transportation networks, i.e. new technology exercised by unchanged humans.
The FFs were flawed human beings who knew enough about themselves, their world, and human history to build restraints and hindrances into the US Constitution to make it difficult for flawed humans to carry out the evil such persons desired.
-
The USC's high bar for amendment is a feature. It hinders amendments that would impose ill-conceived social engineering and demagogues' wet dreams. Which are what The Atlantic seems to want imposed. The writers of the USC understood such an urge and made such destructive changes difficult.
Yup. The fact that it's not conducive to "their democracy" is not a FLAW of the Constitution. It's the POINT of the Constitution.
-
Technology has advanced in the past 250 years, but human nature is the same. Examples:
* The insane slaughter of WW1 battlefield and in WW2;
* Nazi concentration/death camps and Lenin/Stalin Gulags;
* Stalin's Holodomor.
These were all enabled by then-modern weaponry and transportation networks, i.e. new technology exercised by unchanged humans.
The FFs were flawed human beings who knew enough about themselves, their world, and human history to build restraints and hindrances into the US Constitution to make it difficult for flawed humans to carry out the evil such persons desired.
Are these the same morons who want to claim the 2nd Amendment only applies to muzzle-loading blackpowder weapons?
Asking for a friend.
-
Oh. It was a Lawrence Tribe article. :yawn:
Didn't garner much excitement over there. Two DUmmies merely submitted " +1 " as a comment.
The DUmmies do this all the time. They think they can huddle in their little podunk website and do something so earthshaking as change the constitution. They made it hard for a reason, DUmbasses.
Ya he's an ultimate DUmbass, for a lawyer.
-
I read most of the linked article. The gist of it is that everything is hunky-dory if there's a lefty bias on SCOTUS to legislate from the bench but it's atrocious if SCOTUS has too many constructionists.
-
Which will be proven worse, Stalin's Holodomor or Biden's Holodomor? Uncle Joe Stalin or Uncle Joe Stealin?