Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Most constitutional originlist are that way because I think It requires no critical thinking skills or objectivity it requires they just imagine what the founders were thinking in 1788.
Because they can’t accept American and it’s people don’t stand still
They evolve and that scares them
constitutional text is fixed at the time of its ratification,” and that that original meaning “is law” even today.
Imagine if the field of medicine or mathematics science or technology worked under the same logic
But hea now we have a court that’s all about going backwards
|
That's some superior critical thinking you've exhibited. And very original as well. Never heard of those things. Shows my ignorance and my dearth of critical thought.
But it does seem I was sort of right, may just be luck, that Progressives (I assume you're a Progressive) think the Constitution is outdated and inadequate for "our time." Actually, they have often said that, and that it should be replaced by something better. No doubt, better means aligned with their far better ideology.
We probably should have had new constitutions several times already. I mean, things change. There were a lot of decades that passed from then to now. And things change, dramatically, more quickly as time expands. Maybe we should have a new one every five or ten years. Or maybe we should do away with one, and just let the federal government and its courts keep up with the changing times by passing new, appropriate legislation quickly as needed, and the courts could decide, if needed, if the laws are socially just.
Hybrid Mode
