Is there another governing document you prefer?
I wouldn’t get defensive. I tend to share San Jocinto’s initial reaction. Our constitution has been so basterdized and trampled in the past and doubly so in the past 8 months, it is hard to debate what we should have done to begin with. Had we stuck to the very core principles of the constitution this country would be far better.
No offense.
That said, the original federation would not have lasted and the world would be very much different today. It would be a lot worse. But then, we wouldn’t know the difference.
I wouldn’t get defensive. I tend to share San Jocinto’s initial reaction. Our constitution has been so basterdized and trampled in the past and doubly so in the past 8 months, it is hard to debate what we should have done to begin with. Had we stuck to the very core principles of the constitution this country would be far better.
No offense.
That said, the original federation would not have lasted and the world would be very much different today. It would be a lot worse. But then, we wouldn’t know the difference.
I prefer a governing document which recognizes God given rights which the government has no power to regulate to the point of eradication.
It seems our current governing document allows for the confiscation of all wealth and all property with no regard to due process; allows the proscription of free speech critical of incumbent office holders at election time; authorizes heavy regulation and restriction on gun ownership, and perhaps affords no right to own any arms at all outside the confines of a government run 'militia'. Currently, the average working citizen is required to turn over as much as 7 1/2 months worth of his earnings for every 12 months worked; the right to vote is often rendered as meaningless in that it is swamped by rampant fraud and thuggery; every business which employs more than 25 persons is subject to TENS OF THOUSANDS of pages of governmental regulations controlling every aspect of operation (and the smallest businesses fair little better).
Citizens are servants of the State and are being made dependent on it for the basic necessities of survival. The top 1% of taxpayers pay more income tax than the bottom 95%. Economic, social, and electoral arrangements are either in place or are being put into place to ensure that only politicians can be elected to office who are committted to keep the hand-outs coming.
In the 1820's and 1830's there was robust debate about the propriety of government, especially at the federal level, of getting involved in "charity". That debate is over and there is no longer any discussion of it. The Constitution has been so eroded over time as to be unrecognizable to the Founders, but NOTHING has yet happened which compares to the current threat. Socialized medicine, cap and trade, converting illegal immigrants to 15 million new voters only represent the beginning. The Democrats are expanding the number of judges so as to accomodate well over 100 new Obama appointments.
The "freedoms" under the Constitution largely mean the right to abortion, the right to gay marriage, the right to free education and health care for illegals, the right to affirmative action for selected minorities, the right to unionize every privately owned business, the right to "free" food, housing and cell phones for those who prefer not to work, and religious freedom for those who wish to advocate on behalf of foreign terrorists, whereas quoting from the Bible may be prosecuted as a Hate Crime (and absolutely no praying in the schools, of course-- except when Muslims are accorded a special room for just that purpose).
The Constitution is not exactly a "success story" after about 220 years in limiting governmental power of the individual citizen, is it? It is more of a sword in the hand of a powerful government than it is a shield against the government. And we have only been governed by a cadre of actual bona fide committed radical Marxists for less than 11 months.
So, like I said, get back to me in 6 or 7 years.