NationStates Jolt Archive

what's a constitution?, and more importantly, what does it do?

...please say you're joking.

no....

Doesn't it give you hit point bonuses and determines your system shock survival chance?


Okay, Click me! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution)

so its basically 'the law'

A constitution is a document adopted by the heads of state in order to illuminate certain 'rights' the average, every-day citizen has.
By doing this, it gains the power to slowly chip away at 99% of our other natural freedoms, as long as it doesnt touch the handful of things the constitution tells us we can do.
Meaning, its just a decoy used to plunge us into endless discussion and debate about what's constitutional or not, while the heads of state slowly carve away what should rightfully and naturally belong to us: liberty.

Doesn't it give you hit point bonuses and determines your system shock survival chance?

You rule.

Doesn't it give you hit point bonuses and determines your system shock survival chance?
That was indeed clever.

This is when we know the education system has failed. -__-

it gains the power to slowly chip away at 99% of our other natural freedoms

yeah. they do that even though we dont have one, thats just what governments 'do'.

This is when we know the education system has failed. -__-

Exactly what I thought when I saw it.

yeah. they do that even though we dont have one, thats just what governments 'do'.

'we?'

k. so i read up. why is it claimed that constitutions are 'amended', when people go and change them? i mean call it what it is...

'we?'

Not all nations have constitutions.

'we?'

uk. or at least no ones said anything to me about it

i was pretty sure the US constitution was based on the UK constitution? or, i think the Indian constitution was based on the UK and the US constitutions, from what (i think) i learned in ye ole fifth grade history classes in yonder india that is supposedly my place of origin.

Not all nations have constitutions.

which is why i dont understand the point of them

A Constitution is the who, what, where, when, why, how of a nation. It spells out the basic rights and responsibilities of the citizens, how the government functions, its powers, what it can and can't do etc. How many terms your leader can serve, the type and size of your military, everything.

Just about everything in your nation should be spelled out in the Constitution. Like not the piddly stuff like wearing green socks every day, but things like minimum wages, human rights etc

surely all that stuff is covered under laws

uk. or at least no ones said anything to me about it
And that's why you don't know what a Constitution is. Fair enough.

i was pretty sure the US constitution was based on the UK constitution?

i think it was based on the magna carta.... probably out of date now

surely all that stuff is covered under laws

its all bureaucracy man, the only true 'constitution' that should exist is, a la wicca since its such a kick ass quote: "An it harm none, do as ye will"

At least, in private life. Which is mostly what the constitution details, is it not?

Sure, businesses should have (a few) rules cuaz we're all such hard-asses anyway.

Make love, not war! :fluffle:

A Constitution is the who, what, where, when, why, how of a nation. It spells out the basic rights and responsibilities of the citizens, how the government functions, its powers, what it can and can't do etc. How many terms your leader can serve, the type and size of your military, everything.

Just about everything in your nation should be spelled out in the Constitution. Like not the piddly stuff like wearing green socks every day, but things like minimum wages, human rights etc
The UK manages just fine without one of those...the idea that a nation needs a codified consitution is a myth.

k. so i read up. why is it claimed that constitutions are 'amended', when people go and change them? i mean call it what it is...

amend = change/fix.

Amendment = a change/fix to fix something. AKA the amendment that made *all* people equal, regardless of race or gender, theoretically.

amend = change/fix.

Amendment = a change/fix to fix something. AKA the amendment that made *all* people equal, regardless of race or gender, theoretically.

im under the impression that the gender amendment never passed, lol

k. so i read up. why is it claimed that constitutions are 'amended', when people go and change them? i mean call it what it is...

Because amend is a synonym for change?

i think it was based on the magna carta.... probably out of date now

Magna Carta, Bill of Rights, and another English document I can't remember.

I've had to write and explain each one of those today. >.<

uk. or at least no ones said anything to me about it

We don't really have a unified single constitution here in the UK: instead we have a mess of assorted historical documents and legal precedents. It is often termed an 'unwritten constitution' or more correctly as an 'uncodified constitution'. In the end it just means that the constitutional lawyers/experts have a very free hand when it comes to determining what can or cannot be done on the basis of such a random assemblage of bits of paper.


Sidenote: what the hell are we both doing on NS at this time if we are both in the UK?

We don't really have a unified single constitution here in the UK: instead we have a mess of assorted historical documents and legal precedents. It is often termed an 'unwritten constitution'. In the end it just means that the constitutional lawyers/experts have a very free hand when it comes to determining what can or cannot be done on the basis of such a random assemblage of bits of paper.


ahh that makes things a bit clearer


Sidenote: what the hell are we both doing on NS at this time if we are both in the UK?

tsk tsk, some people have no lives =) haha neh, jk, i dont have one either =( im single, ladies! ladies? *crickets chirping*

Magna Carta, Bill of Rights, and another English document I can't remember.

I've had to write and explain each one of those today. >.<
Habeas Corpus Act?

The UK manages just fine without one of those...

For certain values of the term 'just fine'.

im under the impression that the gender amendment never passed, lol

There was some amendment or something that gave women the right to vote/I think equality... I haven't studied the Constitution in depth so I couldn't tell you which one without googling it or something.

There was some amendment or something that gave women the right to vote/I think equality... I haven't studied the Constitution in depth so I couldn't tell you which one without googling it or something.

*shrugs* fair enough, i wasnt sure anyways. ah well. america's effed up either way :rolleyes:

Habeas Corpus Act?

-grabs the homework-

Petition of Right was the one I couldn't remember.

I couldn't tell you either way about the Habeas Corpus Act, as I don't really know what it is.

For certain values of the term 'just fine'.
What 'values', in your eyes, does it not fulfill?

-grabs the homework-

Petition of Right was the one I couldn't remember.

I couldn't tell you either way about the Habeas Corpus Act, as I don't really know what it is.
Sounds like something Lincoln did during the civil war (that's the US's one)

See, there's a problem here;

A constitution is not a list of rights someone has, or what the power of the people is. A constitution is a limit to the power of government. Anything not in a democratic constitution cannot be done by the government without adding it.

A problem with America today is that alot of people don't understand this.

See, there's a problem here;

A constitution is not a list of rights someone has, or what the power of the people is. A constitution is a limit to the power of government. Anything not in a democratic constitution cannot be done by the government without adding it.

A problem with America today is that alot of people don't understand this.
God bless the commerce and necessary and proper clauses.

Sounds like something Lincoln did during the civil war (that's the US's one)
Clicky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petition_of_Right)

What 'values', in your eyes, does it not fulfill?

Oh, you know the fact that it allows things like internment, the PTA, the sudden discovery of obscure and forgotten codices which are then given even more obscure interpretations to legitimise the marriage of the heir to the throne to divorcees... the usual.

Clicky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petition_of_Right)
No, habius corpus...

Oh, you know the fact that it allows things like internment,
The interment that was overruled and declared illegal by the Law Lords?

the PTA,
Parent Teachers Association? :confused:

the sudden discovery of obscure and forgotten codices which are then given even more obscure interpretations to legitimise the marriage of the heir to the throne to divorcees... the usual.
Oh, you mean the ability to adapt to the modern world by not letting archaic ideas about divorcees and re-marriage get in the way?

No, habius corpus...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_Corpus_Act_1679

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_Corpus_Act_1679
Sue me, I'm american :D

Sue me, I'm american :D

As an American, I'll take you up on that.

And I'll WIN, too, because I had to go and look that up for you. Oh, for my time back... I say about $1 mil a second.



blame the sodas/chocolate I've had today.

A written constitution is a document that prevents anyone from telling you what it means.

An unwritten constitution is a set of guidlines that require a constitutional lawyer ( aka Twit ) to tell you what it means.

And that Twit might be wrong...

Just about everything in your nation should be spelled out in the Constitution. Like not the piddly stuff like wearing green socks every day, but things like minimum wages, human rights etc

Almost none of those are covered in the U.S. constitution. Simply put, a constitution is a list of the powers a federal government has, which places limits on how much power it can use.

The interment that was overruled and declared illegal by the Law Lords?

Remind me roughly how long this took, would you?


Parent Teachers Association? :confused:

Nope. The other PTA. You know the one I mean. Think local.

Oh, you mean the ability to adapt to the modern world by not letting archaic ideas about divorcees and re-marriage get in the way?

Not a bad thing in itself, but we see here that the legal powers and experts are utilised to serve the interests of those already in power, rather than Joe Public.

what's a constitution?, and more importantly, what does it do?

Please tell me your not an US citizen.

A constitution is...

That's what political corruption and corrupt politicians do. That is not at all what a Constitution is dumbass. I hate what is being done probably more than you, but that document is the ONLY thing standing between you and a tolitarian government if your case is one in which is able to be legally argued to the point where it becomes a national issue.

so its basically 'the law'

For simple minded folk. Yes that is what you would consider it. A better description would be a outline of a government system or behavior. In the US's case, our Constitution was intended to be a guarantee of civil rights and republic form of government as well as outlining how that government would fuction. Its a blueprint for a nation's government behavior.

k. so i read up...

They are ammended. They can be revised if it is outlined that they are ammendable documents.

i was pretty sure the US constitution was based on the UK constitution?...

The UK doesn't have a Constitution. They have a library of legal cases that they follow. There is a monarchy system that models itself to have citizen representation. The only thing that the US did that would "model" itself after the UK's government outline was a bi-cameral house. What we did however is entirely different than what the UK did in its houses.

which is why i dont understand the point of them

*crosses my fingers and hopes your Canadian.*

the type and size of your military, everything.

Just about everything in your nation should be spelled out in the Constitution. Like not the piddly stuff like wearing green socks every day, but things like minimum wages, human rights etc

No. You went wrong here. There is a difference between Constitutional law and laws made by Congress that are called "statutory law" among other government actions. The Constitution is a broad general outline of how the government is set up. It allows those branches the ability to make its own laws and decisions to fit the current time. Such as size of our military is dictated by threats to the country.

i think it was based on the magna carta.... probably out of date now

More accurate is the Albany Plan of Union (which Franklin had signed) was whats what inspired it. However the US's document's source was actually a relatively original document called "The Virgina Plan". And was created mostly by Madison and Jefferson who basically studied up on books discussing how a Republic should work.

Magna Carta, Bill of Rights, and another English document I can't remember.

I've had to write and explain each one of those today. >.<

...you DO realize the Bill of Rights was the first 10 ammendments to the Constitution... AFTER it was ratified.

its all bureaucracy man, the only true 'constitution'

Stfu already. What ARE you doing on this topic anyway? This is government not religion.

The UK manages just fine without one of those...the idea that a nation needs a codified consitution is a myth.

This is true. However new governments tend to need it so they can get together and legitimately tell the citizens how the government is going to work. UK has

I couldn't tell you either way about the Habeas Corpus Act,

For US citizens if I recall, Habeaus Corpus means the right to be brought to trial and hear what you are being held for. That is why the Bush administrations' actions against Jose Padilla the "American Terrorist" are downright unconstitutional.

God bless the commerce and necessary and proper clauses.

They are necessary at times. However when they are not necessary, it is the RESPONSIBILTY of the citizens to petition the government to change such laws. Biggest problem with American citizens is most are uneducated and lazy when it comes to government. Most don't give a ****.

...you DO realize the Bill of Rights was the first 10 ammendments to the Constitution... AFTER it was ratified.

Yes, I realize that.

I ALSO realize the English had a Bill of Rights, too. Let me pull up some dates and information for you.

1688. Parliament offered the crown to William and Mary of Orange, provided that they agree to the Bill of Rights.

It's also known as the 'English Bill of Rights', which is what I probably should have used... nonetheless, it has a lot of things that we have in our Constitution. Fair and Speedy Trial, nonexcessive bail, freedom from cruel and unusual punishment being covered.

http://www.constitution.org/eng/eng_bor.htm

Please tell me your not an US citizen...political corruption and corrupt politicians do...dumbass...For simple minded folk...*crosses my fingers and hopes your Canadian.*...Stfu already. What ARE you doing on this topic anyway? This is government not religion...



jesus christ man, dont let your fuckin ego get to your head, ad hominem everywhere!

and yeah this IS government and NOT religion. im an agnostic/atheist, and i was expressing my point of view. which, of course, you have every right to contest and debunk, but at least do it in a logical and accepted manner. attack the idea, not the thinker.

at the risk of sounding like a dreamer and an idealist, which i am not, why cant people take care of their images sometimes? they come off as total fucktards and make their fellow americans (who are, mind you, quite decent people most of the time) look like egotistical megalomaniacs who can't resist slipping into ad hominem when ideas other than their own are brought up in discussion.
which isnt true. most of the time.

that said, adios, amigo.

MODS: i know this might look like hate, but its a fair retort at a bunch of ad hominem comments which qualify more as offensive comments against entire groups of people at times, than what i said up here, which was targeted at a single individual.

yeppers.

The UK doesn't have a Constitution. They have a library of legal cases that they follow.
Of course the UK has a constitution. A constitution simply refers to how an organisation is structured or 'constituted' if you prefer.

Remind me roughly how long this took, would you?
The length of time it took for a normal judicial case to go through.

Nope. The other PTA. You know the one I mean. Think local.
Nope, don't know what you're on about.

Not a bad thing in itself, but we see here that the legal powers and experts are utilised to serve the interests of those already in power, rather than Joe Public.
Nope, we see that the UK can adapt to the times instead of being held back by the need to constantly amend a document written in a different era.

what's a constitution?, and more importantly, what does it do?
As usually there are two schools of thought on this: the anglo-saxonic one (US and Great Britain) and tge european one. The former puts much more enphasis in what political science calls negative liberties: the US constitution solely adresses form of governement, separation of branches of power (executive legislative and judicial) and, most important of all, it firmly stablishes the limits of interference of the governement (or, one might call it the "community"), in the realm of the citizen. Therefore, it stablishes precise guidelines of how much the governement can extend its action without surpressing the citizenry rights. The european way, including negative liberties, gives much more importance to positive liberties. While the american tradition eyes the State suspiciously and prefers that it doesn´t play a great role in society, european countries, classicaly, have this view of the State as a begnign player in the life of the community. Therefore, european constitutions have a entire blueprint of rights: right to work, to housing, to a minimal degree of subsistense, to leizure, etc. Therefore, in european constitutions (in ones more than others) at least at the formal level society awards the State an obligation to provide and ensure several "rights" that the american constitution didn´t include, as the americam way has always been that of leaving to the community and private citizens the rigt to pursue their own happiness through their won means.

A constitution is a document adopted by the heads of state in order to illuminate certain 'rights' the average, every-day citizen has.
By doing this, it gains the power to slowly chip away at 99% of our other natural freedoms, as long as it doesnt touch the handful of things the constitution tells us we can do.
Meaning, its just a decoy used to plunge us into endless discussion and debate about what's constitutional or not, while the heads of state slowly carve away what should rightfully and naturally belong to us: liberty.

The constiution's purpose is not to determine the rights of the average citizen. You're thinking of the bill of rights, which was added. The constition sets out how the government makes laws, giving the methods for making and enforcing laws and the limitations on what kind of laws can be made.

It's also known as the 'English Bill of Rights', which is what I probably should have used...

Yes. I believe that would have clarified everything.

jesus christ man, dont let your fuckin ego get to your head, ad hominem everywhere!

and yeah this IS government and NOT religion. im an agnostic/atheist, and i was expressing my point of view. which, of course, you have every right to contest and debunk, but at least do it in a logical and accepted manner. attack the idea, not the thinker.

You do realize all you did was contribute nothing to the topic and present NOTHING but uninformative information. You are essentially doing a mild form of trolling and spamming. Why am I the only one being offensive? Because I dislike the fact you bash something or a concept without knowing **** about it? I'm not the only one painting a bad picture "of a people" you realize. I don't go into UK discussion threads about political parties or issues that concern them and rant about my uninformed opinion as you did here. Americans' aren't the only offensive people in the world. I have yet to hear of a nation that lacks an offensive population you hypocritical stooge.

Of course the UK has a constitution. A constitution simply refers to how an organisation is structured or 'constituted' if you prefer.

Yes, that is essentially what it is. But the UK uses a series of laws and precedents past and practiced historically as its guide. There is no "written blueprint" in the similar fashion as newer nations use that clarifies government action and behaviors to its citizens without them becoming law students. This is the difference between written and unwritten Constitution.

{snip}
Americans' aren't the only offensive people in the world.
{snip}
Durn me sideways - an that's the truth.
;)

First, i hope the thread starter is VERY young and just hasn't had a civics class yet. If that's the case, then KUDOS to him/her for having the courage to ask the question.

Second, if the thread starter is NOT very young, then i hope he/she is from a country without a constitution.

otherwise, the state of Education is truly abyssmal

And by looking at a lot of the answers, either people are making them up so they SOUND like they know what they are talking about...or the state of education, again, really stinks.

A few people are talking sense. (sigh of relief). A Constitution is a document outlining the basic form and function of a government.

ANd I have to agree with the other poster that thinks PTA means Parent Teacher Association.--even when i think locally, since all PTA's are local.

So to the poster that originally used the acronym of PTA not meaning Parent Teacher Association, i have this to say:

ALL PRONOUNS AND ACRONYMS MUST HAVE AN ANTECEDENT. You must define who or what it is that you are using a shortcut to refer to. Otherwise, it is your fault if people misunderstand.

A Constitution is the who, what, where, when, why, how of a nation. It spells out the basic rights and responsibilities of the citizens, how the government functions, its powers, what it can and can't do etc. How many terms your leader can serve, the type and size of your military, everything.

Just about everything in your nation should be spelled out in the Constitution. Like not the piddly stuff like wearing green socks every day, but things like minimum wages, human rights etc

You could do that with normal laws too if you want to ...

A constitution is more something to protect the law from the lawmakers. If everything was 'regular' law, everything could be changed by a large enough majority at one time and the prime minister of england (as an example) could declare himself to be the tsar of Europe, change the name 'UK' to 'Europe', give himself supreme powers, make it law that all girls (or boys, i don't know his preferences) between 16 and 21 are to be photografed each year so that he can select those that will become his personal sexslaves ... etc.

The lawmakers can change every law at will, but they are limited by the constitution to ensure that no drastic changes (usually for the worse) occure. The constitution itself can also be changed by the lawmakers, but with a delay. In my country for example, first they must select the things they want to change in their next term - if they are able to get it - and then they still need a 2/3+1 majority. This ensures that:
-no drastic changes are made on the spot (it takes a few years to say the least).
-the voters have a say in the change.

First, i hope the thread starter is VERY young and just hasn't had a civics class yet. If that's the case, then KUDOS to him/her for having the courage to ask the question.

Second, if the thread starter is NOT very young, then i hope he/she is from a country without a constitution.

otherwise, the state of Education is truly abyssmal
The OP has already said they are from the UK, which has no written constitution, therefore when they would be learning history, they wouldn't hear anything about a constitution...sp they are unlikely to know what one is unless they find out for themselves.

A constitution is a document that lays out for all to see the powers and structure of any given government.

The OP has already said they are from the UK, which has no written constitution, therefore when they would be learning history, they wouldn't hear anything about a constitution...sp they are unlikely to know what one is unless they find out for themselves.

Ah, if that is true, I missed it. My sincere apologies to the o.p.

what's a constitution?, and more importantly, what does it do?

A constitution is a form of "contract" known as a "Social Contract".

The purpose of a constitution is to define a relationship, in a legal sense, between the "government" and the "governed"; and express other ideas in relation of people to one another.

The US Constitution for example defined a "relationship" between the people of the several states; and a larger representative body from those states which handle matters inside and outside of the states. Each state, in turn, has its own "constitution" which defined the relationship between the state government and the people of that state. In this system, the constitution (contract) lays out the specific structure and specific powers of the government for the performance of their duties to the "people" in relation to one another, other states, and other "countries" outside of that contract.

what's a constitution?, and more importantly, what does it do?
No, I won't do your homework for you.

No, I won't do your homework for you.

lol... so suspicious...

Anyway, people are incorrect when they're claiming Britain has no written constitution.

we have an uncodified constituion, which just means that its not written down in one place.

But the problem is that it only adds one limit to the power of parliament- That it can't bind it's succsesor(sp).

So theoretically they could even take away our right to vote.

The other annoying thing about the British constitution is that it depends alot on convention e.g. it's convention that a government resigns when it recieves a vote of no confidence but there's nothing that specifically states this.

Same with a lot of other things that we take for granted, nothings written down to say that it has to happen.

So theoretically they could even take away our right to vote.

Did Magna Carta die in vain?

:) In Australia we have a constitution that divides out the various governmental responsiblities between the federal government and the states. Its not ammended very often because in order for an amendment to be made a referendum is held (we have compulsory voting), and the ammendment (or addition) has to achieve a simple majority in a majority of the states and is usually a Yes/No choice. Since we australians have a distrust of our politicians we usually vote no in a referendum - such as the doomed 1999 referendum to change australia from a constitutional monarchy to a republic. A referendum to change our constitution is very rare as it costs a huge amount of money due to our system of compulsory voting.

The constitution is a law, which takes precedence over other laws, and is harder to change than a regular law. Many countries also require a review if a new law conflicts with the constitution.

Most countries choose to include the basic human rights, some responsibilities and a complete description of the system of government. It's there to say what laws the parliament can set with a simple majority. Others want to include pointless B.S. as in USA, where there were amendments to ban alcohol and gay marriage. Such are not really constitutional issues.