posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 12:40 PM
reply to post by Hopechest
How can you say that what was meant or said at the Convention means nothing today?? That is a red herring argument if I have ever heard one. Of
course what was meant matters more than anything. The Supreme Court is not the law of the land, the United States Constitution is.
If you had taken time to watch the video, nullification CAN happen when it comes to powers not delegated to the federal government in the
Constitution. Point out to me where it states that the feds have power to demand that I MUST participate in commerce or be punished.
You might bring some argument of the Interstate Commerce Clause, but that has been grossly misinterpreted for years.
"As we've seen throughout the Courts history, they often change their views on the same issue multiple times depending on who's sitting on the
bench." I am not sure about you, but I find this view very disturbing. This is why the courts should have NEVER moved towards case law instead of
original intent. With a view like this, a law could be interpreted by the whim of men instead of years of legal precedent.
I don't think the Constitution is a mess. I think lawmakers and judges and lawyers muck it up by injecting personal opinions or feelings into how
they think the law should be defined. Sure, the Founders could have never foreseen some of the ways our culture would change, but that is why they
made the document with the language it currently has. If something needs to be changed down the road, there is a process for amendments. Problem is
that nowadays, the roadblocks to surpass the Constitution by certain branches of government have been removed over the course of time and slowly our
institutions are being eroded.
What I fear most is the rhetoric you speak with. Why is it that we have just a small segment, a couple thousand folks, determining what is best for
me? Why is it that in the end 12 men in black robes determine how I spend my own hard earned money?