Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: John Robertson
"Here’s my belief. If by “living document” you mean one that is “subject to change” and “open to re-interpretation,” depending on prevailing thought, or current trends, or political winds, I disagree. But if by “living document” you mean that our Constitution is one of the most brilliant—maybe the most brilliant—documents of government ever written; that its genius has inspired countries all over the world to form governments based on ours; that the God-given rights and freedoms it guarantees every one of us not only allow us to have this debate about it but to protect us while we’re having it, then I agree completely. Our great Constitution is every bit as alive in this very moment that we speak about it as it was when the Founders created it at the start of our country. Everything we are as Americans comes from it. Our rights. Our strength. Our prosperity. Most of all our freedoms. None of us should want to risk any of that by bending or twisting parts of it at convenient times. If we do that too many times, we might not recognize it one day. And that is the day when we might not recognize ourselves as Americans. I don’t ever want to see that day, which is why I have chosen nominees who respect the Founder’s intentions when it comes to the Constitution."

Both definitions of "living document" in this paragraph are wrong. The Constitution "is" a "living document" in that it can be changed at will BY A 2/3 VOTE OF EACH HOUSE OF THE CONGRESS AND A VOTE OF 3/4 OF THE LEGISLATURES OF THE STATES---i.e. its written amendment process.

Until such a change is made, the the "originalist" doctrine is the only correct one---it must be interpreted "as written", and "as understood" by those who wrote it.

12 posted on 07/13/2005 7:09:19 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Wonder Warthog

Yes, of course. But I didn't think that was germaine to this speech, in the end, if only for reasons of length. I actually cut a couple sentences of the prez giving a brief "civics lesson" re the amendment process, because they ruined the flow. Tecnically you got me, but my goal was to have a psychologically and emotionally controlled speech build to an inevitable conclusion (therefore, supporting his choices).


24 posted on 07/13/2005 7:41:28 PM PDT by John Robertson (Safe Travel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Wonder Warthog
Both definitions of "living document" in this paragraph are wrong. The Constitution "is" a "living document" in that it can be changed at will BY A 2/3 VOTE OF EACH HOUSE OF THE CONGRESS AND A VOTE OF 3/4 OF THE LEGISLATURES OF THE STATES---i.e. its written amendment process.

Thank you. The Constitution evolves through the amendment process. If the amendments you seek are not happening, elect a new legislature or a new executive. A Constitution that changes day-by-day according to the whims of justices is a shifting sand rather than the rock upon which the Republic rests.

27 posted on 07/13/2005 7:46:19 PM PDT by jimfree (Freep and Ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson