Seems to me, our current political climate is nothing close to what the founding fathers wanted. Can't we just sell/lease the Constitution to a developing country who needs one? We'll have to include an expiration date of 200 years.
2007-07-13 06:09:24 · 18 answers · asked by Thundercat 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Ok Gunslinger...here is a great specific example.
First, here is the 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Now this: The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 states that revenue will be withheld from states that allow the purchase of alcohol to anyone under the age of 21. States were forced to raise the age to 21 or lose revenue that was originally paid by the citizens of each state do the federal government.
2007-07-13 06:26:13 · update #1
I was going to send the info to Gunslinger who accused me of being a troll, yet he has blocked all email access....
2007-07-13 06:27:37 · update #2
It is only as obsolete as we allow it to become, and THAT is the Crux of the matter. We have become complacent, and lazy in our belief that our government will always know what is best for us, and that voting for our elected officials is meaningless. How many times have you heard someone say, "My vote does not count, so why should I vote?". That attitude somehow absolves us from responsibility for the crop of bad politicians we now have in Washington? No, I don't think so. Be INFORMED about those whom you vote for. Know where they STAND on the most important issues that effect YOU! If everyone did their homework on the candidates, the constitution would again be a living, breathing part of our republic, and not the "relic of anachronism" that it has become, where the law of the land belongs only to those who can afford to buy it!
2007-07-13 06:34:45 · answer #1 · answered by piper54alpha 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
the style of ridiculously a techniques-fetched question is in step with somebody's infantile would desire to be persuasive via being over-dramatic. provide up being a stupid little drama queen!! once you're factor (without the a techniques-fetched drama) is that there are some provisions of the form that are being violated recently then i could respond that of course there are. All for the time of this united states's historic past there have been some rules that have been made that have been unconstituitonal and a few criminal convictions that have been gained in a fashion that's unconstitutional. right this moment isn't any distinctive than the previous. Do i like the form? no longer all areas of it. I actually have a great variety of innovations for amendments that i could prefer to advise and ratify.
2016-11-09 05:37:26 · answer #2 · answered by olli 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, the amendments are not want the founding fathers wanted . Many of the amendments have destroyed the integrity of the constitution .
You have stated it is not obsolete if you believe the constitution to be more valuable than current documents of countries 200 years later .
2007-07-13 17:45:49 · answer #3 · answered by Sin nombre 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"...There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. ... Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence, I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants, and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men, and become the instruments of their own undoing." -- Daniel Webster, June 1, 1837
2007-07-13 07:17:10 · answer #4 · answered by Mr.Robot 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Under FDR when he tired of the SCOTUS denying his New Deal policies on Constitutional grounds and threatened to stack the court with Justices more inclined to amend the Constitution by judicial fiat. Once we did away with the Amendment Process of Article V, we lost contoll of the most powerful tool in the hands of the people against their government.
2007-07-13 06:21:20 · answer #5 · answered by flightleader 4 · 6⤊ 1⤋
When Bush and Cheney spat on it, when Antonin Scalia ruled it out, when Bush and Alberto Gonzalez called it just a piece of paper and then wiped their *&$%'s with it, violated it's spirit and intent and laughed at it as the supreme law of the land. The founder of the Republican Party, first secretary of the treasury and defender to the death of our republic, is sickened in his grave, if it is possible to sick when you're dead. Trust me he is.
2007-07-13 08:09:27 · answer #6 · answered by opinionator 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When they set up the Federal reserve back in (1913?)
2007-07-13 06:59:32 · answer #7 · answered by harold. 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
December 12, 2000, when it was betrayed by Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor. And if you don't know what I mean, then you probably weren't smart enough to vote for Gore, or Kerry, or the next Democratic nominee.
2007-07-13 06:12:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
When the Constitution was drafted, the world was a much different place. It is an excellent foundation but left much open for interpretation. The interpretation of the Constitution is what went awry.
2007-07-13 06:28:55 · answer #9 · answered by Sandy Sandals 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
When Liberals made up the lie that Seperation of Church and State was in the Constitution when all it says was that Congress cannot establish or ban a Church, but that clause says nothing about Seperation of Church and State, it doesn't even ban State Governments from doing the deed.
Heck it does not ban Prayer in School either.
2007-07-13 06:14:04 · answer #10 · answered by MrCool1978 6 · 5⤊ 4⤋