You make a persuasive argument for mob rule, but those sacred "words on paper" are - dare I say it? - seared into the minds of a dwindling few of us, and may prompt us into action someday.
Chief Justice Marshall in the Marbury Vs. Madison decision established that the words in the constitution mean what ever 5 justices say they mean... today. They reserve the right to say the same words mean something else tomorrow. Justice Marshall and his fellow justices took away the real meaning of the constitution over 200 years ago. It is interesting to note that the Madsion in Marbury VS. Madison... was the man who wrote the constition. Madison lost the case. The court ruled that the author of the Constitution did not know what it meant. They ruled it did not matter what the actual author of the constitution said the constitution contained. The only important thing was what the Justices ruled Madison meant when he wrote it.
You have to close your eyes and believe that the constitutino fairy is real. No one who is not a supreme court justice can believe the words in the constitution mean anything with any degree of certainty.
To play with the brains of idiots, the supreme court even claims that words that are not in the constitution are really there. The word abortion is not in the constitution.... Abortion wasn't in the constitution until the supreme court found them in what they called the Penumbra of the Constituion. The supreme court ruled that he word Abortion was in the penumbra of the constitution, but only supreme court justices can see it. The justices imagined abortion was in the constitution and now it is.
I defy you to find in the constitution where is says blacks are only 3/5 of a human being. But that is what the Dupreme court in 1857 ruled the constitution said. Justices have always seen things no one else can see. The law is what the Justices say it is.
The constituion does say that there are to be three separate parts of government... the executive, legislative and judical. Yet in a decision approving of the Food and Drug Administration, the court ruled that just one group of 7 members could pass laws, accuse citizens of breaking those laws, then try those accused, convict them and issue punishments. You can't show me in the constitution how quasi Judicial agencies can be legal.... It is in the constitution because the supreme court says it is. The Supreme court nearly 100 years ago ruled the separation of powers clause in the constitution did not exist for regulatory agencies.
I could give you a hundred examples of the Courts violating the clear words of the constitution by saying the words did not mean what they clearly mean or that the words did not exist, or that words that don't exist do exist.
The only thing that counts IN THE REAL WORLD is not what the constitution says, but WHO GETS TO SAY WHAT IT SAYS. Only someone who has never read supreme court decisions and read the constitution could believe as you believe. If you took even a few mintues to study the real world, you might just see that for well over 200 years the actual words in the constitution have no finite meaning to the only people that count... Supreme Court Justices. What the justices say those words mean.. is all that matters.