Friday, April 21, 2017

Comment on Originalism vs. the Living Constitution, the Filib...

If I may, there is a linkage between the current mindset that the Constitution is a "living document" and demise of the Judeo-Christian world view. We currently live in a culture that has abandoned the concept of objective "Truth". There are no such things as absolutes, standards or even truth itself. Everything is relative to the person viewing or experiencing it. People are rejecting the biology of two sexes. Sex as in male or female has been substituted with gender, with your "gender" being what ever newly invented term you wish to use, including new gender pronouns of your choice.

If I state that "identify" as a one-eye one-horn flying purple people eater, and my preferred pronouns are fe, fi, fo and fum, then magic happens and I become what I identify as, demanding that reality and society conform to my wishes. The distinction between sane and insane is blurred. Now, by stating the Constitution is a living document, means one can change at whim the meaning of words both in how a word is defined, and its implied meanings. It allows a judge to expand the use of government power rather than limiting it via object truth. It allows for a judge to say; the Constitution says what ever I say it says. It allows for finding new rights. It allows for Supreme Court Justices to make new laws when a court case is brought before them, or to negate a law if they personally don't like it. By ruling on what is "Constitutional" the nations overall culture and moral values can be changed. Examples?

Reading the Bible and using its teachings in the public class room is unconstitutional (know that commandment, You shall NOT commit murder). It has been ruled constitutional for a woman to murder her unborn child for any reason what so ever and to demand that others pay for it. Therefore, if you wish to have your political world view imposed on others then you need a living constitution. If your world view is of limiting what others may do to you and what power they have over you, then you need to have an original constitution.



  1. When a person says the Constitution is "living", he means he's above the law: The law conforms to him and to the reigning balance of power.

    Ironically, each of them pledge to uphold the Constitution...

    Even law schools teach the new interpretations of the Constitution. So, a great many people just assume the "living" Constitution is the real thing.

    I don't believe the Constitution is this amazing document as many Americans do. But I like the Bill of Rights, and I believe in the need for a source of authority, which the Constitution provides.

    What's ironic to me is how so many of the Constitution's "defenders" don't see immigration as a threat. New immigrants though are part of a different political culture. So, even if believing in the virtues of a diverse society, the newcomers aren't from our political tradition.

    Rather than reducing immigration though, these "defenders" seem to believe others will agree to return to the law if having it explained to them.

    The truth is, few care about the authority of the Constitution. We were basically an English colony. Today, the percent of English-descent in America is very low. Americans don't much identity with the Founders. The Founders are, if anything, evil racists which modern America rebelled against in a series of revolutions.

    1. Americans don't much identity with the Founders. The Founders are, if anything, evil racists which modern America rebelled against in a series of revolutions.

      A sad state of affairs.