You said — “Geez. Never thought I’d see that posted here. At DU, but not here.”
Well..., take it in the context that I meant it. It was not meant as disrespect to the nature of what the Constitution represents and the words. It’s simply a recognition that it’s not a “magical piece of paper with words” that “does something” on its own.
It’s absolutely no good without the *kind* of people that originally wrote it — and that means those who believe that it was God who has to do with establishing this nation and also maintaining this nation.
Now..., at the present day, I would say that the way the majority of the voting electorate is acting (with what their “vote” represents) — that they’ve abandoned God and all that He represents for our country. And if that’s the case (which I believe it is, by the actions of the voting public) — then this means that the Constitution is *invalid* with that very same voting public (which is why this “natural-born” issue gets no traction). Absent the recognition of the part that God plays in our society in the foundation of the country and in maintaining this country — the Constitution means nothing.
It only means something *in the context* of how it was originally put together. I don’t believe that context exists like it did in the beginning...
—
There may be a few who still believe as the original founders believed (in that they depended upon the Creator God to help them found the country and to maintain the country) — but those few remaining do not represent the majority of the voting public and therefore are losing out. And, as a result, the Constitution is losing out, too...