living document? Change with times?

Discussion in 'Politics and Religion' started by buster40c, Jul 24, 2015.

  1. buster40c

    buster40c Well-Known Member

    8,549
    267
    83
    Calling the Constitution a living breather document is being used to shred it. What's so ignorant is what the politicians and president are doing now is exactly why the Constitution was written as it was. It was written to stop tyranny which is exactly what our present government is practicing now. Big business through lobbyists are buying power our politicians really don't have a right to exert.
    http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/201...101-living-and-breathing-is-the-same-as-dead/
     
  2. VThillman

    VThillman Active Member

    2,733
    24
    38
    The term "living, breathing document" is literally meaningless. Figuratively, the term "means" what ever the sayer wants it to. The procedures for changing what the Constitution means are stated within the Constitution. Without using those procedures, the Constitution just means what it says; it really isn't significantly vague or equivocal.

    Even SCOTUS is not charged with interpreting the Constitution; the court is charged with holding the actions of the other two branches to it.

    BTW executive orders that usurp the prerogatives of Congress are supposed to be countermanded by SCOTUS. Seems like those folks are too, ah, mature to be distracted by mundane things from doing their job. So what is holding them back?
     

  3. buster40c

    buster40c Well-Known Member

    8,549
    267
    83
    Watching our government I come to the conclusion I am much more intelligent than I thought I was.
     
  4. Tommycourt

    Tommycourt Tommycourt

    2,139
    17
    38
    When did SCOTUS become a branch of legislation? According to the Constitution their job is to INTERPRET the law and not enact laws. Our forefathers spent many hours, days and years forming the Constitution and the laws that were set down to be observed. Now the POTUS can use his executive power to over ride the laws as written using a presidential fiat. As far as I am concerned, term limits should be upheld for politicians and the Supreme Court judges. Once a legislature gets into Congress, he tries to be appointed to a committee and then he worries about his re-election. The Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment, regardless of age and ability to comprehend. Some of our Supreme Court judges are so old that they can't stay awake during a judicial hearing nor are capable of making sure our Constitution is not violated. Seems to me that term limits should be acceptable for them as it is for a POTUS. And thank God that our present POTUS only has a little over 17 months to reign supreme. Our forefathers are rolling over in their graves as I speak now. What a travesty our nation has become.
    Tommy