[KarlInOhio]

“The professorate, the bench and even the American people have all been seduced into believing in, and I hate the term, ‘a living Constitution,’” he said.

My argument whenever I run into a "living Constitution" believer is "Would you lease a car from a dealer who insisted that the lease contract was a 'living document' that could change on his whim?"

[MrB]

Would you want to play poker with someone who stated that the rules were “living”?

If we have a “living” Constitution, we have no Constitution.

It’s a contract with an amendment process.

[HaveHadEnough]

"Would you lease a car from a dealer who insisted that the lease contract was a 'living document' that could change on his whim?"

Good point, but there is another side.

"If your father leased a car for you before you were born, would you want to be held to the lease terms if the only way to change the terms was by getting a super majority of your fellow citizens to agree with you?"

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

Quote, ‘My argument whenever I run into a “living Constitution” believer is “Would you lease a car from a dealer who insisted that the lease contract was a ‘living document’ that could change on his whim?” ‘

That is an invalid, uneffective argument. The problem with your making such an argument presupposes that liberals are capable of this thing called “logic”, which they are not. The only respond to raw emotion.

This is why you can’t reason with a liberal. Logic merely confuses them.