UGH! How stupid can these people be?!?!
I find it hard to believe that Obama studied Constitutional Law. Anyone who studied in that field knows that this isn’t true. The Constitution is not a living thing. It’s just paper with words on it. It doesn’t talk, eat, or sleep.
You want to change it? 2/3 majority vote from each state, please.
EDIT: Anyone that
I agree. It’s one thing to say that the constitution can be interpreted differently throughout times. It’s another to say that it’s living altogether. Is it a living breathing organism? I don’t think so.
I guess Obama never passed Biology.
not surprising.
“Living” constitution=dead constitution.
It essentially means it can be interpreted any way they want, which means that there’s no point in having a constitution at all.
All documents are “living, breathing” documents. People always end up interpreting them however they want.
The Constitutionalists are going to be pissed off at this one.
I say good riddance to the constitution, or the constitution as a rigid binding document on all society for all time (or the romantic picture of “the republic” as a thing worthy of being preserved or restored). It’s just that the replacement-interpretations offered by garden-variety political liberals isn’t something to celebrate either. The problem isn’t that the constitution isn’t rigidly applied as “originally intended” or as an unmalleable foundation, it’s the very idea of such a legal order in the first place.
Ah, the hermenuetics of law.
In school I was taught it was a living, breathing document. That it can be amended with the times. I can’t wait for the 211th, 212th, and 213th amendments that will finally make everyone equal. (I hope someone gets that reference…)
What is cruel or unusual punishment? What is commerce? What process is due? Non are defined.
Interesting. So you’ve become a relativist now, too?
From its inception the Constitution has been used as a weapon against liberty.
Actually, it’s either 2/3 majority of both houses of Congress plus a simple majority in each of 3/4 of the state legislatures, or a proposal from 2/3 of the state legislatures plus a simple majority in each of 3/4 of the state legislatures.
Seems like a whole lot of nitpicking to me. Has the steady erosion of American’s rights really been affected by what they call it?
Replacing who?
The subject is misleading. He’s actually a nominee for the 9th Circuit. He’d be one level below the SC.
Why do we need supreme court justices? Just ask the piece of paper.
Senator such and such: Mr. Paper… should we suspend habeas corpus?
Constitution: the answer is complicated. I will think it over and get back to you…
although its living and breathing, apparently its also mute [:D]