To: A CA Guy
The position I have posted was Congress's statement on the matter. They stated that rather than Ammend the hell out of the Constitution (thereby making it meaningless), they in every generation re-interpret it to meet the needs of the current generation. If they would add Ammendments to it for every need, the Constitution would become a document without meaning. Without a ton of Ammendments, most of the Spirit remains intact. That is the Congressional view. Who said this?
266 posted on
09/14/2005 11:51:31 AM PDT by
Ken H
To: Ken H
Yes, as my explanation of the way the Constitution is handled IMO today.
You could handle all the issues of a high population society by adding either 35,000 amendments to the Constitution (which at one point the Congress website said would then make the Constitution just a nice old historic paper) or they do what they do now, which is to reinterpret.
I find it a problem personally, you can take your choice though, whether it be judicial interpretation or 35,000 amendments... YOU STILL WON'T GET YOUR RECREATIONAL DRUGS.
276 posted on
09/14/2005 12:12:17 PM PDT by
A CA Guy
(God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson