For those who INTERPRET the CONSTITUTION literally?

[CN1]

bro you just answered your own question, the american democracy has become a fiasco and huge legal based system, the judicial system combined with legal litigation, such as terms and laws has switched the so-called democracy to a legal courtyard of lawyers and judges, think about it, why do we have lawyers, and what makes up our laws of government, the judges.....and when somebody breaks the law who do you call, a lawyer, thats it, judges give precedents based on past cases, and judges make up our current laws, if someone or there is an area that or matter that arises dealing with the constitution, the judges have the final say, and make up their own new law...........how do you think the people in office stay wealthy and rich, with power, the lawyers and judges vote them in, while other powerful rich coorporations team up with these influential individuals to hire our congressmen, senators, and president!!!!!1

 

[Laserdude]

RyanH is a WOMAN. So if you care to look at the post with her going after Warik, the previous paragraph before the closing refers to a woman's right to vote.

This was never an issue regarding the constitution. Just her view (a fraudian slip on her part), but none the less I am not surprised to have figured this one out.

Women are mostly in favor of removing the second amendment altogether. And I think I am RIGHT!

So Ryan, go to hell it is your fate.

 

[MR.?]

Initially, the Constitution was written to provide precise and stringent guidelines of the responsibilities of the government. The Bill of Rights was written to acknowledge the rights and freedoms of each citizen. The governments main responsibility is to protect the rights and lives of each citizen. Despite its concrete guidelines, the need for flexible interpretation is necessary for further growth.

The modern era of politics has changed and molded the way the Constitution is interpreted. Our Constitution in comparison to other foreign nations documents of declaration is short and vague. The Constitution was never written to be flexible and consequently problems arise when interpretation is misguided and abused.

The advent of new legislation and decisions made by Federal Supreme courts have change the landscape of the Constitution. The Constitution in one respect can be viewed as a definitive document void of discrepancy and subversion. In an other respect, the Constitution is viewed as ambiguous, as well as a growing and ever changing entity within itself.

We cannot aggresively apply the Constituion to the needs and concerns of our present day nation and government. As our nation evolves so should our perception of the constituion. However, the correct interpretation of the Constitution will always remain an issue of circumstance and personal foresight.

Just my opinion