Constitution helped all men?

Question

in a few days i have to do a debate on whether or not the Constitution was meant to only benefit the elites or help everyone.

my side is in support of the elites

does anyone know of any documents or evidence or even comments the other side might make because we have to counter what the say.

so i was just wondering if anyone knew any good arguments their side could make

Answer 1

The constitution neither helped nor supported anyone.

The constitution is essentially a contract.
It lists the rights, benefits and obligations of the people, the states and the nation. In a nutshell, that's all it is...

Now, all people are equal under the constitution, and none really benefitted more than others...however in some instances, some benefitted at the expense of others, while in other cases it was the other group that benefitted at the expense of the first.

The originators knew it was imperfect in this sense, and therefore allowed us to address those iniquities through the ammendment process....which we have done, successfully.

In the original draft... slave owners benefitted more than most, as their slaves counted as 2/3 a man, therefore those land owners wishes were over represented in the early congresses, because even though slaves were counted as 2/3 of a person...they couldn't exercise it any way.

However, the little guy benefitted, because now he and his home and his property were now protected by law..the wealthy estates (north and south) had the staff to protect their property....now the little guy had the same protection against annexation, search, seizure...

There was a debate during the constitutional convention, that ONLY land owners should vote.....because the uneducated masses could be more easily swayed to a popular, but unwise policy or voting for a popular though poor person for an office through advertising and media.

However, since these were all wealthy estate owners at the convention, the fact that they did not do this shows how much they were really in this for the benefit of the country.

Unfortunately, there is no really good argument for your side, that the constitution was made to benefit the elites...it was specifically designed with the intent that all made be equal in the eyes of the law....

Were they right, in all aspects of this goal?...of course not, they were imperfect humans, however..they did a pretty darn good job.

Answer 2

The other side will cite the various instances in which "the people" is referred to. However,in the original document (i.e. before the amendments subsequent to the Bill of Rights ), the "people" was not at all as inclusive as it is today.

Obviously slaves were not included although, for the benefit of their owners, 3/5 were counted for the purposes of representation. Women had rights but not the right to vote. In fact, the individual states had the right to determine the qualifications for voting and didn't have to provide it to slaves, women and most had requirements of some property ownership. The Electoral College was set up as a way of separating the popular vote from the choice of President by"Electors" who didn't even have to be popularly elected in all cases.

Answer 3

Personally I feel that the constitution was meant to benefit everyone, but not necessarily include everyone. If I were debating the view opposite yours, I would probably go to the Federalist Papers, which were meant to appeal to the common people because they were the ones who had to ratify the constitution. Those essays are what I would base my argument upon.

Answer 4

John Locke said "Man is free and in this condition all men are equal. The founding fathers used Locke's ideas among among many others when they wrote the constitution.

Answer 5

Read the constitution! There are surprises there for everyone. See what it says about women, about slaves, about public schools and health care. Find where it mentions Income Tax. Look who is authorized to declare war.