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

Skip to comments.

Constitutional CPR [ The Constitution, Living or Dead? ]
Bangor Daily News ^ | 9/16/10 | Editor

Posted on 09/16/2010 9:38:35 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay

Alive or dead? Today, the 213th anniversary of the United States Constitution, that question looms large. This is especially so as the document is wielded like a sword, cleaving libertarian from progressive philosophies. Understanding the nature of the Constitution — neither underestimating its genius nor overstating its authority as inerrant — is critical.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once said, “The Constitution that I interpret and apply is not living, but dead.” That view has been embraced by many in the tea party movement. These opponents of President Barack Obama’s agend, who thrust the federal government into many areas of national life, argue that the president and Congress must return to a restrained, constitutional purity. Many also assign a kind of divine inspiration to the men who drafted the Constitution, almost implying the document was handed down by God on Mount Sinai like the Ten Commandments. That view flies in the face of the disparate spiritual beliefs and political views those imperfect men held. More

(Excerpt) Read more at bangordailynews.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: breyer; constitution; constitutionisdead; livingconstitution; scalia
Justice Antonin Scalia: The US Constitution is 'Dead'

Justice Antonin Scalia - A Living Constitution

1 posted on 09/16/2010 9:38:37 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTRe5xDLfXw

Justice Antonin Scalia: The US Constitution is ‘Dead’

This is a better link


2 posted on 09/16/2010 9:44:14 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
The Constitution is a contract. The worst type of contract is the one which one party can change it on a whim without any need for the other party to give his consent (think of what credit card contracts are like). The "Living Constitution" crowd is trying to turn it into something as fluid as that.
3 posted on 09/16/2010 9:55:56 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (Gun control was originally to protect Klansmen from their victims. The basic reason hasn't changed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

Like the Folowers of Absolom, the living constitution crowd is likely to find that there is still life left in the authority raised up by God, after all.


4 posted on 09/16/2010 10:01:17 PM PDT by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

The credit card analogy is imperfect. You can quit using the credit card whenever you want. You’re stuck with the SC’s capricious interpretations of the Constitution whether you like it or not.

The article’s argument is nonsensical. Voting rights were changed in the manner explicitly prescribed by the Constitution. That is, they were changed by amendment, a process that is explicit in the Constitution.

The conclusion of the article is, however, roughly correct. As a practical matter, the Constitution is a dead letter. Lots of folks like to pretend that it has meaning, but it’s all just make-believe. As the Speaker of the House said when asked about the Constitution, “Are you serious? Are you serious?”


5 posted on 09/16/2010 10:25:58 PM PDT by Skepolitic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
Why are we using the left’s wording about interpreting the Constitution. We walk around saying that it is ‘dead’ and have already half lost the argument. The constitution was meant by the founders to be the ‘rock’ upon which all of our laws are based. The left wants a constitution of ‘clay’ that leaves us at the mercy of tyranny.
6 posted on 09/16/2010 10:41:26 PM PDT by WMarshal (Where is the next Sam Adams?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

Look what the Obama administration did with the General Motors take over.

Contractual obligations to investors, lenders and suppliers were ignored and the interests of the labor union were illegally given top priority. They paid no attention to contracts or the law; they made up their own rules to arrive at the conclusion they wanted.

This is how leftists view the US Constitution - just another document to be invoked when it serves their purpose, to be ignored or misrepresented when it does not.


7 posted on 09/17/2010 2:24:01 AM PDT by Iron Munro (I prayed: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it - He sent the Obamas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

Like Justice David Brewer wrote in 1905 The Constitution is a written instrument as such its’ meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted it means now.” if true when the supreme Court decided the South Carolina case after those years since it was adopted by Congress —then it seems logical it is equally true even today.Unless amended by the process allowed it ought be understood according to the clear
meaning of the terms used when adopted.


8 posted on 09/17/2010 4:55:14 AM PDT by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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