It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Consitution is a Vague Document

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Throughout the history of the United States, it can be seen that the Constitution that we dear and love has a lot of loopholes.

It's simply too vague and prone to multiple interpretations.

There are so many examples in history that shows how the government can "obey" the Constitution and still do something that was supposed to be prevented by the Constitution.

Some themes include:
War declarations
Formation of banks
Taxation
Supreme Court decisions
Foreign interventions
Removal of "rights"


I just don't have the time to find all the specific cases
.


Do you guys think we need a new Constitution?

[edit on 12/20/2009 by die_another_day]




posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Not a chance in Hell do we need a new Constitution.
Not only is the origanal the greatest political document ever made, and not even approached by anything else, but a new one would inevitable be written to further special interest.
You cannot improve on perfection.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   
No... The Constitution is quite clear both on the intent and definition.

I wouldn't trust a single politician in our time to re-write a constitution. It would be a 2,000 page bill which transferred ALL rights to the Government.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger

You cannot improve on perfection.


It's just a damn piece of paper.

Get over it.

It's history.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Not a new one... I believe we need to pay closer attention to the existing one.
Well, not we... perhaps those above us in the food chain.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
So all the blood that was spilled fighting the wars, earning and declaring this can just be sh*t down the drain? I hope i never see that day.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Actually the Constitution is pretty perfect as it stood originally.

The amendments and other things that came after are what really screwed you guys.

Particularily when the Supreme Court ruled that a corporation was a person, and therefore had all the rights of a person.

~Keeper



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   
I don't believe our Constitution is the problem. The problems are:
1) SCOTUS Justices appointed based on previous ideological legal decisions
2) Lawyers
3) Lawyers
4) Lawyers



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


The personhood of corporations was not a amendment. It was an intentional misuse of one. The amendment allowing us to vote on senators, the emancipation of slavery, women's rights. There are good amendments when used properly to help clarify what the document meant.




In the United States, corporations were recognized as having rights to contract, and to have those contracts honored the same as contracts entered into by natural persons, in Dartmouth College v. Woodward Corporations were recognized as persons for purposes of the 14th Amendment in an 1886 Supreme Court Case, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 118 U.S. 394. Some critics of corporate personhood, such as radio personality Thom Hartmann, claim that this was an intentional misinterpretation of the case inserted into the Court record by reporter J.C. Bancroft Davis. [1] Bancroft Davis had previously served as president of Newburgh and New York Railway Co.


wiki



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   
The founding fathers wrote up a perfect set of guidlines (i.e. The Consititution) for their time because the PEOPLE of that time frame were NOT as short on common sense, logical thinking, or common goals as we are today.

The mindset was clear back then without the ludicrous crap people conjure up these days.

If the founding fathers were to come back today and see how certain people throughout history DESTROYED what they had set up, I promise you this...we would have to dig some REALLY big holes for all the bodies! Those guys didn't take the time or spend the money to hear excuses, they simply acted and accomplished.

It is sad, but these days we don't fight for anything anymore as WE THE PEOPLE...PEOPLE just bitch, piss and moan as individuals!



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   
No, the constitution is fine as is, what we need is a glossary added with a number added to each provision in the constitution. Within that glossary would contain language so simple and so straight to the point that there would be no re-interpreting anything the document says. Also we need to add an amendment that limits the amount of supreme court justices to 9 if somebody like FDR comes along again he can't threaten to add more justices to get his way.

For example, the 10 Amendment says:


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


What should be added is a number in brackets like "[ 7 ]" or whatever and you look up that number in the glossary and it says something like:


The US Congress cannot pass a law if it is not defined in the constitution. That is left up to the states as long as they don't break the laws defined in the constitution.


Or something really straight to the point. Lawmakers hate writing bills like that because it doesn't leave open loopholes for their corporate buddies to capitalize on. That way if the congress does try to pass something unconstitutional we have recourse to have those people arrested and tried.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by die_another_day
Throughout the history of the United States, it can be seen that the Constitution that we dear and love has a lot of loopholes.

It's simply too vague and prone to multiple interpretations.

There are so many examples in history that shows how the government can "obey" the Constitution and still do something that was supposed to be prevented by the Constitution.

Some themes include:
War declarations
Formation of banks
Taxation
Supreme Court decisions
Foreign interventions
Removal of "rights"


I just don't have the time to find all the specific cases
.


Do you guys think we need a new Constitution?

[edit on 12/20/2009 by die_another_day]



It is not the constitution that is flawed. It is our unwillingness to insist that our government adhere to it.

And when time calls for a constitutional matter to be addressed the power of amending it is in our legislatures... in this respect I would ask that the legislature give the power of amendment to the people by 80% majority.
I figure if 80% of us want a constitutional change there is a darn good reason to implement it. Lord knows the congress-critters probably would not even read an amendment before voting on it these days.

The duty to ensure the constitution is respected is on us. Learn it and live it.

[edit on 20-12-2009 by Flakey]



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Thomas Jefferson believed each generation has the right and duty to rewrite the Constitution, though he was forced to PUBLICLY retract that statement because of political pressure from the reactionary blowholes of his time, but I'd bet he always privately maintained what he originally said.

I see no problem in giving new life and meaning to the Constitution, as long as its original spirit of people power, not government power, can be maintained. The OP is right in that the document DOES contain too much vague, lawyerly-sounding, ambiguous gobbledygook. For example, NO ONE has been able to TRULY define WTF a "well-regulated militia" ACTUALLY is.

It appears the vast majority of Americans need to worship unclear (enough) political documentation in the same basic way as their/your beloved, strictly interpretive religious texts (Bible/Christianity). They/you thrive on confusion and discourse, whether acknowledged or (usually) not. Anything BUT real clarity is God here, whether religious or secular.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flakey
Lord knows the congress-critters probably would not even read an amendment before voting on it these days.


Unfortunately, neither would the voting masses.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   
The problem isn't the constitution.. It's the citizens. America is infamous for its dumbed down, belligerent population of suckers.

We can talk about "how do we fix our problems," all we want.. but the fact of the matter is, we're a democratic republic, and we elect politicians on behalf of the people, who represent the people, to carry out the will of the people.

Unfortunately, the people are incredibly stupid, easily propagandized, and generally fearful. That's a cocktail for failure, if you ask me.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Dean Goldberry
 



"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed."

A well regulated militia is just a group of free individuals with weapons and military discipline... It is not always needed but one never knows when the state will need to call upon the people to fight for her. SO THEN the right to keep and bare arms must be maintained in the event the state needs to call forth its militia which again would just be armed men and women willing to adhere to following orders and military discipline.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 11:04 PM
link   
You all do know what a "living" document means, right?

I find it ignorant that some say a document is perfect.

It is not. For the time, it was.

New things pop up, new problems, and new resolutions need to come into play.

How can anything such as a law be perfect in the period of an infinite time span?

Important document, should always be enforced...but nothing is ever perfect for we are forever changing.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover

Originally posted by Flakey
Lord knows the congress-critters probably would not even read an amendment before voting on it these days.


Unfortunately, neither would the voting masses.


That is your opinion sir and I respectfully disagree with it. But I will fight for your right to express it.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist
 


The constitution is not a "living document". That is a progressive talking point so they can pass all kinds of laws to try and circumvent the constitution.

Furthermore the only thing that has changed in the 200 years technology. There has always been corrupt politicians and judges to interpret laws to mean something completely different because it is something that they don't understand.

Either we are free or we aren't. Same thing with the internet, if the government snoops on your activity it is an invasion of privacy. It is as simple as that.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kaytagg

Unfortunately, the people are incredibly stupid, easily propagandized, and generally fearful. That's a cocktail for failure, if you ask me.


They are easier to control that way.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join