Why worship a constitution?

[mistermack]

Isn't it very like religion, for Americans to hold the constitution in such awe? That's why they say "enshrined" in the constitution.
It's just a document, drawn up years ago, by people who were just as flawed as today.

It's not a good principle. I've read people on here, saying that the constitution is a good thing, it's a brake on the power of modern politicians. That's only true, if it's a good brake. What if slavery was "enshrined" as a right? Or birth control forbidden?

Modern people, who know better, would have to change it. That's all. The same applies to the constitution as it stands. If it's wrong, change it.

People won't improve it while it's held in such quasi-religious regard. It's just the views of some politicians. Get over it!

[normal]

I've had this feeling from time to time too.

[Feck]

"I don't want a nation of thinkers. I want a nation of workers."

-John D. Rockefeller

[Robert_S]

Because deep down we know there are vastly more ways to fuck things up than improve them.

Also, we don't trust our politicians to not make a horrible mess of things.

[mistermack]

Because deep down we know there are vastly more ways to fuck things up than improve them.

Also, we don't trust our politicians to not make a horrible mess of things.

Yeh but, the people who wrote it WERE politicians, and perfectly capable of fucking things up. It's just that their fuck-ups will sit there for a lot longer.
.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Even funnier is when people respond to comments on the US Constitution with "Well, it was founded on our Magna Carta, you know."

[Santa_Claus]

It's the American Bible - couldn't run a fundamentalist state without one.

The Free world has laws to say what you can't do. The US only alllows it's people to do what they have permission for. sad.

[MrJonno]

Something in the American psyche that wants moral absolutes, whether its religious or secular?. I don't think other countries treat their very similar constitutions in the same sort of way

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It's the American Bible - couldn't run a fundamentalist state without one.

The Free world has laws to say what you can't do. The US only alllows it's people to do what they have permission for. sad.

Depends. Are you a tight or a loose interpretationist?

[Geoff]

Isn't it very like religion, for Americans to hold the constitution in such awe? That's why they say "enshrined" in the constitution.
It's just a document, drawn up years ago, by people who were just as flawed as today.

It's not a good principle. I've read people on here, saying that the constitution is a good thing, it's a brake on the power of modern politicians. That's only true, if it's a good brake. What if slavery was "enshrined" as a right? Or birth control forbidden?

Modern people, who know better, would have to change it. That's all. The same applies to the constitution as it stands. If it's wrong, change it.

People won't improve it while it's held in such quasi-religious regard. It's just the views of some politicians. Get over it!

But they do change it when they feel like it anyway, that's what all those amendments are about.

What I find more strange is all the different states having different laws.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

But they do change it when they feel like it anyway, that's what all those amendments are about.

Thomas Jefferson said we should rewrite the entire constitution every twenty years to fit current needs.

What I find more strange is all the different states having different laws.

The Federal government is charged with dealing with matters that affect more than one state. The individual states make laws that purportedly work best for their local conditions.

[Santa_Claus]

It's the American Bible - couldn't run a fundamentalist state without one.

The Free world has laws to say what you can't do. The US only alllows it's people to do what they have permission for. sad.

Depends. Are you a tight or a loose interpretationist?

Neither - I'm Free.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It's the American Bible - couldn't run a fundamentalist state without one.

The Free world has laws to say what you can't do. The US only alllows it's people to do what they have permission for. sad.

Depends. Are you a tight or a loose interpretationist?

Neither - I'm Free from content.

And Me too!

[Coito ergo sum]

Isn't it very like religion, for Americans to hold the constitution in such awe? That's why they say "enshrined" in the constitution.
It's just a document, drawn up years ago, by people who were just as flawed as today.

Very true. The Constitution is a document, and ought not to be thought holy. It ought to be understood. Mostly, it isn't. People seem to think it guarantees everything they see as important, and they think it expressly prohibits everything they don't like.

It's not a good principle. I've read people on here, saying that the constitution is a good thing, it's a brake on the power of modern politicians. That's only true, if it's a good brake. What if slavery was "enshrined" as a right? Or birth control forbidden?

For the most part, the Constitution is a good brake. Slavery was enshrined in it originally, which illustrates the practicalities and failures of the time. Politics ruined it. Luckily, that bit was changed, and now slavery is rightly prohibited. To the extent the Constitution were to enshrine something bad, it would be the responsibility of the people to change it.

Modern people, who know better, would have to change it. That's all. The same applies to the constitution as it stands. If it's wrong, change it.

Yes, and there are procedures for doing that. There are many amendments to the US Constitution. I think 27-ish. I am not inclined to google it.

People won't improve it while it's held in such quasi-religious regard. It's just the views of some politicians. Get over it!

Well, the US Constitution is conceptually different than a lot of other constitutions. A lot of modern constitutions are lengthy codes that have all sorts of proscriptions and prescriptions that change and are amended as if it's a statute. In the US, the Constitution is supposed to be a very general document that sets up a basic framework, carving out broad swaths of this and that, separating powers, and granting broad and loosely defined rights. The application of the Constitution to reality is meant to be done practically, and that's why the meaning of say, the 4th Amendment right to be free from illegal searches and seizures and the warrant clause, etc., can't be understood in a vacuum. One needs to look at legal cases involving that amendment.

The Constitution is a living, breathing document. For example, the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures is just that - it's not a right to be free from searches and seizures, just "unreasonable" ones. So, what's reasonable? That can change with the times.

People, of course, harken back to the "golden age" of America, when our "Founding Fathers" were solemn and pure and thoughtful, knowing the "true way" from which we have strayed. Those folks, however, generally haven't read, much less understood, the Constitution or SCOTUS opinions on Constitutional issues.

[Coito ergo sum]

Because deep down we know there are vastly more ways to fuck things up than improve them.

Also, we don't trust our politicians to not make a horrible mess of things.

Yeh but, the people who wrote it WERE politicians, and perfectly capable of fucking things up. It's just that their fuck-ups will sit there for a lot longer.
.

Absolutely - but, they did a fairly decent job with the Constitution, by and large.

The Constitution is not impervious to change, it's just intentionally meant to not be changed frivolously - changes should be desired overwhelmingly.