I agree,.. though that's a better plan than letting students carry guns I'm religiously opposed to the death penalty, abortion, and euthanasia.
"That being said it's not the same as it was in 1789. We're much more complex and connected now and that requires more concentration in federal hands. However we must keep in mind that bureaucracies tend to grow organically and it is imperative that their growth be held down as much as required." Just looking at this quote above from your post Do you think the constitution is a "living breathing" document?
Agree with Jefferson's quote however if minority rules then why even have votes to decide anything? If majority votes in a law against running a stop sign but the minority thinks it's OK to run a stop sign and feels they are discriminated against by the majority is it OK for the minority to run a stop sign? I will recommend again you read Tyrrany of the Minority by Thomas Soule, who is black BTW.
Tough question Kiki. The easy answer is yes. That's what amendments are for and we've had what 25 or so? Considering in the original version senators weren't elected but appointed by state legislatures and then there is slavery. Need i say more. Likewise the Supreme Court has since the beginning interpreted the constitution and how laws apply. Of course that's not what you meant I suspect. I believe that yes the constitution is a living document but the principles stated in it and its bedrock meaning is immutable. To take it as literal and immutable would prevent it for being applied as our society has changed. The conditions in 1789 bear little resemblance to those today. There is difficulty in applying a document written for an 18th century society with the needs and circumstances we live in today.
If the answer is yes as you say the entire document is in jeopardy. It will become; Right to free speech but Right to bear arms but And on and on. Just look at how the left has used the but but with the second amendment. You are fooling yourself Winston the lefts ultimate agenda cannot coexist with our constitution.
you twist sentences to setup your argument,.. no one said minority rules, in fact the Jefferson quote specifically said, "the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail". My point was, minority opinions and beliefs have to be protected from the trampling feet of the majority.
but you didn't refer to that, you went off track, talking about minority rules and stop signs. the minority needs protection,.. the majority protects itself.
They grow cancerously. That's organic but not in a good way. And time has changed nothing in this regard.
I was on track my analogy was correct. Another analogy is students who have better grade point averages being told they have to make way for other students who have a lower grade point average because they are a minority.
