NationStates Jolt Archive

Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy with a man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least.

Reading some of these threads about the new SCOTUS judge and the 2nd amendment etc, I found something interesting...

It's like they are talking about the Bible! There are Bible Literalists, and Constitutionalists, there are people who like to see amendments and try and interpret things into the consitution, and there are all kinds of interpretations for their religious documents.

How come? I'm hard-pressed sometimes to see the difference between the two.
Most countries have a constitution (wanna see the German one (http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/eurodocs/germ/ggeng.html)?), but it seems that that usually means that when a law is passed, a quick check is done whether it's okay by the rules and then we move on.

But in the US interpreting the Consitution is not only an industry, it's also some people's basis for their lifestyle (maybe I'm overdoing it a little...)

Anyways, why do people make so much more of the constitution in the US than in other countries?
It's a document written by humans (not gods, nor semi-gods) more than 200 years ago - its applicability can only go so far!

It was the first constitution to be approved of by submitting it to the people it would govern. My male ancestors (well, some of my male ancestors) got to vote for the people who would decide if their state (Virginia for my family, by the way) would ratify it. There is pride in that I suppose.

Though, I personally didn’t sign it or vote on the ratification, and many (possibly most) Americans don’t even have colonial ancestry. I have my own set of rights that I believe all humans are entitled to. Some are in the constitution, some aren’t.

BUMP
Eventually it'll catch on...

the first thing to realize is that the founders actually are an eternal unified diety who set down from on high their commandments. after that it's all about the number of fetuses that can dance on the head of a pin.

The Constitution forms the basis of American Democracy by limiting the scope of the Federal Government. Thus, Liberals hate it.

Most Americans regard it as very important because thusfar it has served us very well over 2 centuries, unlike some European Constitutions (France. Jeez, are you guys up to the like Fifth Republic now?):p

It cannot be overstated.

I think you have missed the point; the reason why it is of so much importance to Americans and the US is that there is nothing else. Europe and the rest of the 'old world' has thousands of years of tradition to look upon to guide their culture. Theocratic states have their founding religions and holy books to guide them. The United States of America is only just over 200 years old. When it was founded, we delberatly broke with our parent country. We rejected the traditions of Great Britian and forged a new nation out of many different people, cultures, and beliefs and are still doing it. Since there's no shared culture or tradition to look to, the Constitution is IT. It's the only thing hold America together, as all of us, red or blue state, conservative or liberal, black, white, Asian, or what have you agree and have agreed to the rule of law as laid out in that document.

America in many ways is unique upon that point. In many other nations you can never be, truely, one of them unless you were born there. But to be an American, you just have to agree to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

Of course upholding it doesn't mean we have to agree what the damn thing says, but it gives us something to pass the time with. :p

The Constitution forms the basis of American Democracy by limiting the scope of the Federal Government. Thus, Liberals hate it.
I'm Liberal and love the Constitution.

But anyhow, the big deal is that people want to grab power, and the Constitution won't let them. Exactly what its supposed to do, insure that the people have rights, and to insure that the government doesn't fall into tatters with these rights.

I believe that the American government is set up as it is so that a short-lived majority doesn't come in and shove American life to the extreme left or right. A little sway is OK, but not too much now.

And some people believe that the Constitution doesn't apply to today, because the writers didn't think about what could happen in 200 years. Remember Y2K? And how everything was fine when we hit the big 2000? The Consitution isn't broken, but it doesn't apply perfectly to everything, and we can't rewrite it, so we interpret it to suit our needs.

Now its Conservative needs, seeing as to how they are the unified majority and the Dems in the Congress and Senate really don't have the organization to do much of anything. I personally think Dems don't have much of a back-bone these days, and a third party? Has that ever worked? (sorry, addressing judge thing, back on topic)

And since the government just had to seperate church and state, something has to be the core doctrine, so it might as well be The Constitution, America's governmental Good Book/Scroll (figuratively speaking).

EDIT: I think that we share many cultural traditions with Britain, and that the USA came about because of European culture. We didn't reject their way of life, just the current king, because we felt he wanted too much of our money. And then the South really didn't want to go along with it anyhow, it was just the Northern States that wanted independence. Its rather difficult to explain, to get the whole jist of it, we need more American's opinions. And America at the time was still very English in the politcal arena, as slaves were slaves, even though there were a some Frenchmen and German speaking people at the time.

EDIT: I think that we share many cultural traditions with Britain, and that the USA came about because of European culture. We didn't reject their way of life, just the current king, because we felt he wanted too much of our money. And then the South really didn't want to go along with it anyhow, it was just the Northern States that wanted independence. Its rather difficult to explain, to get the whole jist of it, we need more American's opinions. And America at the time was still very English in the politcal arena, as slaves were slaves, even though there were a some Frenchmen and German speaking people at the time.
Well, when I said we rejected British traditions, I should have clarified, we rejected a great deal of the unwritten rules of the UK.

People go on and on about the U.S. Constitution as though it's a huge deal because it is, in fact, a huge deal. We live in a land of two laws. One is the law of the United States Congress. Our Senators and Representatives create and vote on bills that get signed by the President. The second is the Common Law, a body of law made by judges, justices, etc. When the two disagree, some pretty interesting things can happen. The way you read the Constitution determines whether or not a woman can ever have an abortion. It determines whether or not white children and black children will be schooled together. It determines what consenting adults can do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. It has a drastic effect on the everyday lives of every American.

As to the quick check of the rules, the Constitution actually originally included a fourth branch of government whose job it would be to check every new law against the Constitution to be sure it fit the rules, but the Framers opted to leave that article and that institution out of the U.S. government. As such, the Supreme Court of the United States picked up the slack. Unfortunately, they aren't allowed to do anything without there first being a controversy, so only certain laws are ever examined. Now, one might argue that the legislature and the executive ought to be smart enough to know whether they're passing an unconstitutional law, but that just hasn't been the case.

I kind of don't like the way I wrote this, the way it turned out. I feel like it doesn't really address the question. But someone may find it entertaining or informative, so I'll leave it up. Just don't hold it against me, please.

I kind of don't like the way I wrote this, the way it turned out. I feel like it doesn't really address the question. But someone may find it entertaining or informative, so I'll leave it up. Just don't hold it against me, please.
I feel that way most of the time I post! Don't worry about, and keep it up! :p

(France. Jeez, are you guys up to the like Fifth Republic now?):p

Fifth, yes. We seem to be staying there for now, though. :D

Actually, we have got the 1789 Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen. It might not be as cherished as the US Constitution, but we are taught all about it in school.

Anyways, why do people make so much more of the constitution in the US than in other countries?
Bah, constitutions are for wimps. Britain and Israel don't have constitutions, and we do okay... to a degree.

Anyways, why do people make so much more of the constitution in the US than in other countries?
It's a document written by humans (not gods, nor semi-gods) more than 200 years ago - its applicability can only go so far!
The fact that the Constitution was written by human beings is one of the reasons it is more important, more interesting, and more precious than any "God-sent" scribblings.

But then how does one justify being dogmatic about the constitution?

How can that piece of paper, ultimately a document of its time, not ours, be the justification for allowing criminals to own guns, or make people add Snowy the Snowman to an Ad so it doesn't look as religious?

At one point the constitution was apparently okay with Slavery, right?

why do people make so much more of the constitution in the US than in other countries? It's a document written by humans (not gods, nor semi-gods) more than 200 years ago - its applicability can only go so far!
The US Constitution is often the only thing holding together a polyglot, contentious, extremely diverse and highly vocal collection of minorities which form the American populace. In such an environment, "the rule of law" is many times the only thing upon which we can all agree. As the "ultimate law" for the US, the Constitution becomes THE source document. Leave it alone!

Leave it alone!
Back off....I have my pen right here!

...*scribbling*...now bow down to your new master!!! MUHAHAHAHA!

No, seriously, it's none of my business how Americans decide to live their lives, as long as they leave the rest of the world alone with it - but I still find it fascinating how the consitution is treated.
And so it's interesting to see why people think that is.

The Constitution forms the basis of American Democracy by limiting the scope of the Federal Government. Thus, Liberals hate it.

I hope, for consistency's sake, you're grouping most of the present "Republican" administration into your category title of "Liberals". Simply because, I have seen no evidence of Democrats or Republicans directing their attention towards any limits upon Federal powers.

From my viewpoint, it is the opposite... No true liberal would be opposed to limiting federal power.

I think you have missed the point; the reason why it is of so much importance to Americans and the US is that there is nothing else. Europe and the rest of the 'old world' has thousands of years of tradition to look upon to guide their culture. Theocratic states have their founding religions and holy books to guide them. The United States of America is only just over 200 years old. When it was founded, we delberatly broke with our parent country. We rejected the traditions of Great Britian and forged a new nation out of many different people, cultures, and beliefs and are still doing it. Since there's no shared culture or tradition to look to, the Constitution is IT. It's the only thing hold America together, as all of us, red or blue state, conservative or liberal, black, white, Asian, or what have you agree and have agreed to the rule of law as laid out in that document.

America in many ways is unique upon that point. In many other nations you can never be, truely, one of them unless you were born there. But to be an American, you just have to agree to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

Of course upholding it doesn't mean we have to agree what the damn thing says, but it gives us something to pass the time with. :p
see that? there is an example of a nicely presented, well thought-out and intelligent post... fluffles!

i still prefer the british way i think (no written text). the US constitution may be a unifying force for the culture of the nation, but it still has problems: the biggest one i see, as an outsider, is the 'biblification' (hey i made up a word!) of the text, as suggested in the OP... and i just don't like it

In Britain there is no written constitution, which means they don't get stuck in the old ways.

EG Art 1 Section 2 "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

From my viewpoint, it is the opposite... No true liberal would be opposed to limiting federal power.
Indeed! The Republicans once campaigned on being the party of small government, but now they're spending like they just got a platinum card and forcing the federal government into the bedrooms and hospital rooms of private citizens! I long ago came to expect larger federal government from the Democrats, but I would appreciate if at least ONE party would represent those of us who aren't interested in being parented by the state.

Indeed! The Republicans once campaigned on being the party of small government, but now they're spending like they just got a platinum card and forcing the federal government into the bedrooms and hospital rooms of private citizens! I long ago came to expect larger federal government from the Democrats, but I would appreciate if at least ONE party would represent those of us who aren't interested in being parented by the state.
Perhaps surprisingly enough, I agree with you on this. :eek:

I've always been an advocate of "that government governs best which governs least." This is my most serious issue with Republicans. Seems like both parties want bigger government for their own reasons, leaving those of us who view big government with a jaundiced eye out in the cold. :(

They are awfully attached to it, don't you think? When I once implied (okay, directly said) that their constitution wasn't all that - I still don't think it's all that, and think that it is terribly vague so as to 200 years on still need to be bickered and gone on and on about what certain pieces actually mean, I mean, come on, 200 years and you still don't know what for instance the second amendment means, and that "all men are created equal" needs subsequent additions to actually mean all men, not just whites, and all people, and not just those with penises, and so on - I almost got lynched.

They worship it too much, IMHO, and in light of its shortcomings, too zealously.

*ducks and covers anticipatively*

They are awfully attached to it, don't you think? When I once implied (okay, directly said) that their constitution wasn't all that - I still don't think it's all that, and think that it is terribly vague so as to 200 years on still need to be bickered and gone on and on about what certain pieces actually mean, I mean, come on, 200 years and you still don't know what for instance the second amendment means, and that "all men are created equal" needs subsequent additions to actually mean all men, not just whites, and all people, and not just those with penises, and so on - I almost got lynched.

They worship it too much, IMHO, and in light of its shortcomings, too zealously.

*ducks and covers anticipatively*
Heh! it's very difficult for non-Americans to fullly comprehend the reverence in which we hold the Constitution. But as I indicated in my post above, it's often the only thing upon which we can all agree, and even then we differ on some of the particulars of interpretation. That's why it's been called "a living document," since we will probably always be in the process of defining exactly what it means in particular cases. This goes a long way toward explaining why the appointment of new Supreme Court Justices can become such a bone of contention.

Heh! it's very difficult for non-Americans to fullly comprehend the reverence in which we hold the Constitution. But as I indicated in my post above, it's often the only thing upon which we can all agree, and even then we differ on some of the particulars of interpretation. That's why it's been called "a living document," since we will probably always be in the process of defining exactly what it means in particular cases. This goes a long way toward explaining why the appointment of new Supreme Court Justices can become such a bone of contention.

*peeps out from behind barricade*

Gee, I was expecting more firepower from the last time I said something similar. Thank you for the nice reply, and, yes, it is very hard to understand.

The US Constitution was intentionally designed to be vague....

The difference between it, and many foreign constitutions, is the basis upon it. The US Consitutitution was written under the perspective of common law [the common rights of men], thus it makes no attempt to [nor claim of] enumerating and codifying every single principle, simply because, under common law, such is unneeded....

Europeans, on the otherhand, as well as most others, are more familiar with the Civil Law system of government... Which requires anything and everything to be codified for it to work.... So, really, the difference in understanding is heavily cultural.

I believe in MY Constitution based on the 10 Comandments, and I follow it daily. The U.S. Constitution is outdated, poorly written and totally ignored on my part. Praise be to GOD allmighty!

Please do remember that not all Americans are slavishly devoted to the text of the Constitution. In fact, there's an awful lot of us that say, much as some people here have, that it's ridiculous to try to run a modern society based solely on what a few people said two hundred years ago. As such many people will argue, as was already pointed out, the Constitution is vauge on purpose so that it can adapt with the times. We can ammend it or interpret it if it no longer seems to fit the world. That's its strength. Not all of us treat it as though it were holy writ.

If you think the Constitution is overrated you should take a look at what came before it-The Articles of Confeceration.
New York and Massachusetts picking on Virginia. Trade wars between states. Border disputes. I'm not sure, but I also read somewhere that each state could mint their own currency.
It was done away with in order to unite these individual states. But the states didn't want to give up their sovereignty and just become America as opposed to The United States of America.

I believe in MY Constitution based on the 10 Comandments, and I follow it daily. The U.S. Constitution is outdated, poorly written and totally ignored on my part. Praise be to GOD allmighty!

This has to be another Jesussaves, no? I mean, calling a 200 year old document outdated, but not one that is thousands of tears old, not to mention claiming to live by it, but then breaking the commandment of not using the jealous and spiteful deity's name in vain? It's too hypocritical to be real... no, scratch that, on second thought it's just too hypocritical not to be real. :rolleyes:

This has to be another Jesussaves, no? I mean, calling a 200 year old document outdated, but not one that is thousands of tears old, not to mention claiming to live by it, but then breaking the commandment of not using the jealous and spiteful deity's name in vain? It's too hypocritical to be real... no, scratch that, on second thought it's just too hypocritical not to be real. :rolleyes:
LOL! As I said in the thread on "Debate," ideological and/or theological "believers" irritate the crap outta me! :p