2006-12-06 07:36:45 · 6 answers · asked by Mario Vinny D 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
I dont think we should because congress will turn the whole constitution to have a completly different meaning than originally attended.
Although times have changed since the constitution was written and it is historically biased it would be an open invitation for the different parties to force their views, opinions and ideals through.
The Supreme Court do interpret the consitution in different ways to make a decsion on court hearings showing that the constitution can be made to be seen in a modern light.
2006-12-06 07:49:58 · answer #1 · answered by Myra 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The quality of answers is improving. I expected to see some pretty unconscious comments when I checked this out , but there has been thought. It's nice to see.
My own opinion is that we should not be too quick to amend the Constitution because of a currently popular way of thinking. That was done in 1919.(Prohibition) It had to be corrected 14 years later at great cost to our Nation in the years between.
The founders purposely made the Constitution vague. understanding that they couldn't foresee every eventuality. The wisdom they showed in this is proven by the simple fact that, if we discount the two "Prohibition" amendments, the years from 1789 to the present have only seen 24 occasions when change was seen as desirable---------Actually even less, since the first ten amendments were ratified right along with the document itself. (The bill opf Rights)----------makes 14 times in 217 years. And think of the changes in society in those years.
Seems like the old Constitution hods up pretty good. I say leave it alone unless there is a REAL need.
2006-12-06 17:57:38 · answer #2 · answered by JIMBO 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on what you mean by that. What we "need" now may not be what is "needed" in the future. In one of the amendments, African-Americans are said to be worth exactly 3/5 of white people. At the time it was "needed" to ease tensions but now we would never do that to African Americans anymore. Or affirmative action (which I don't believe is an amendment but was and is currently law) may have been needed at one time (and may still), but sooner or later we will no longer need that. But once amended it is very difficult to get un-amended.
By the same token we now "need" to stop the gays. But sooner or later we as a society will realize that we cannot stop them nor is it right for us to try. Then we will no longer need to stop gays from getting together. Amendments are hard to get passed, even harder to get repealed. We need to make sure it is worth it before we start oppressing others as we did the Native Americans, the African Americans, the Mexicans, Women, and so on.
2006-12-06 15:48:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There would be endless debates on what our current needs are. Trust me on this one. They would go on and on and on and no consensus in the end. Besides, it's nearly impossible to amend the Cons. due to the stringent legal requirements. Consult your Government 101 text book for the requirements.
2006-12-06 15:45:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No! Our constitution is arguably the world's most perfect document-it already contains what is necessary for every situation.
2006-12-06 15:46:44 · answer #5 · answered by lady Ironhair 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We do all the time.. that is what amendments are for
2006-12-06 15:42:37 · answer #6 · answered by katjha2005 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋