Happy Constitution Day!

[charby]

On this day 228 years ago, after four months of deliberation and compromise, a group of men gathered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to sign their names to a document that would usher in an never-before-seen style of governing. The United States Constitution was based on the people and the philosophy that government came from the people. Echoing through those words are the philosophies of some great men in history including John Locke and Sir Edward Coke.

It takes less than 8 minutes to read the original Constitution (slightly more if you add the amendments). Not everyone may agree on how to interpret the Constitution, and those debates over its meaning rage on even today. But please never lose sight of the fact that those disagreements and different views allow the Constitution to continually remain a document that is as remarkable and applicable today as it was all those years ago.

As we celebrate Constitution Day, spend a few moments reading the document that enshrines the United State's freedoms and system of government and reflect on how 228 years later it still guides and protects this nation – as Lincoln put it – "of the people, by the people, and for the people."

Happy Constitution Day!

[Perd Hapley]

Thanks for the reminder. I had it in mind last week, but here it is the 17th, and it had slipped my mind.

[grampster]

Constitution?  What is the Constitution?  I don't need no steenkin' Constitution.  I have a pen and a phone.  Executive.

We concur with the previous statement.  SCOTUS

Don't interrupt our lunch with the Oligarchs.  Congress

[charby]

Constitution?  What is the Constitution?  I don't need no steenkin' Constitution.  I have a pen and a phone.  Executive.

We concur with the previous statement.  SCOTUS

Don't interrupt our lunch with the Oligarchs.  Congress

We still are the greatest country in world.

[SADShooter]

We still are the greatest country in world.

True, but arguably by an increasingly narrow margin.

[Ron]

May it RIP, we hardly knew it before it died an untimely death.

[charby]

True, but arguably by an increasingly narrow margin.

I bet someone has felt that way since it was ratified. In a nutshell, societal norms change, so does how the USCON is applied because of those changes.

[Perd Hapley]

I bet someone has felt that way since it was ratified. In a nutshell, societal norms change, so does how the USCON is applied because of those changes.

Changing societal norms and the increasingly narrow margin are not mutually exclusive. You might say one causes the other...

I'd actually like to see a world in which we are not the greatest by an "increasingly narrow margin." I'd just like to see it involve more of them catching up to us, rather than us running down to the world's level.

[brimic]

I'd actually like to see a world in which we are not the greatest by an "increasingly narrow margin." I'd just like to see it involve more of them catching up to us, rather than us running down to the world's level.

We are changing our societal norms so we can be mediocre and craptastic- just like everyone else.

[Perd Hapley]

We are changing our societal norms so we can be mediocre and craptastic- just like everyone else.

Well, in this world of changing societal norms, who's to say what is a societal norm, or whether said norm is changing, or whether change is really change, or whether norm is more normal than not, or whether, in fact, any of this is really real in reality? Hmmmmmm?

[brimic]

Well, in this world of changing societal norms, who's to say what is a societal norm, or whether said norm is changing, or whether change is really change, or whether norm is more normal than not, or whether, in fact, any of this is really real in reality? Hmmmmmm?

Or if moral relativism is only relative to the morals of relatives???

[charby]

Well, in this world of changing societal norms, who's to say what is a societal norm, or whether said norm is changing, or whether change is really change, or whether norm is more normal than not, or whether, in fact, any of this is really real in reality? Hmmmmmm?

Is the cat dead yet?

[SADShooter]

Is the cat dead yet?

Which cat? The one self-identifying as a gyrocopter?

[brimic]

Which cat? The one self-identifying as a gyrocopter?

No the tranny self-identifying as a cat.

[Perd Hapley]

I've decided I need a size XXL t-shirt that says, "I self-identify as a cut body-builder with six-pack abs."

[Ron]

In politics and culture if you start from the premise that the observed world was created by a rational creator who has revealed himself through his rational creation you will get different results than if you believe the observed world is the result of chaos, randomness and/or chance plus time.

Like a retrovirus postmodernism/cultural Marxism infected the rational and reasonably stable culture with a sound philosophical foundation and weakened it from the inside out.

Our institutions are now being used to destroy the foundations of the western world that brought them into being.



     

[SADShooter]

I bet someone has felt that way since it was ratified. In a nutshell, societal norms change, so does how the USCON is applied because of those changes.

You are doubtless correct regarding the historical perspective re: COTUS. I will contend, however, that even the most ardent Federalist, be it from 1795, 1895, and even 1995 to some degree, would look on the contemporary extra-Constitutional power of the Federal government in horrified dismay. I believe COTUS was in part intended as a check on the political and legal impact of your changing social norms to preserve a set of fundamental principles. As the Constitution's influence is diminished by aggregation of power-executive, judicial, legislative, or bureaucratic-those principles are eroded. If what the United States represents is materially altered so radically, the COTUS loses meaning and purpose.

[brimic]

I've decided I need a size XXL t-shirt that says, "I self-identify as a cut body-builder with six-pack abs."

Triggered!

[brimic]

You are doubtless correct regarding the historical perspective re: COTUS. I will contend, however, that even the most ardent Federalist, be it from 1795, 1895, and even 1995 to some degree, would look on the contemporary extra-Constitutional power of the Federal government in horrified dismay. I believe COTUS was in part intended as a check on the political and legal impact of your changing social norms to preserve a set of fundamental principles. As the Constitution's influence is diminished by aggregation of power-executive, judicial, legislative, or bureaucratic-those principles are eroded. If what the United States represents is materially altered so radically, the COTUS loses meaning and purpose.

But, but, but, COTUS is a living breathing document!!!!

[SADShooter]

But, but, but, COTUS is a living breathing document!!!!

Sure. On a ventilator.

[charby]

In politics and culture if you start from the premise that the observed world was created by a rational creator who has revealed himself through his rational creation you will get different results than if you believe the observed world is the result of chaos, randomness and/or chance plus time.

Like a retrovirus postmodernism/cultural Marxism infected the rational and reasonably stable culture with a sound philosophical foundation and weakened it from the inside out.

Our institutions are now being used to destroy the foundations of the western world that brought them into being.



     

Rome and Greece didn't last forever either.

[SADShooter]

Rome and Greece didn't last forever either.

Reinforcing his point.

[charby]

Reinforcing his point.

Both of ours.

No, matter how one pisses and moans about changes, nothing stays static forever.

Also most of us on here don't have the political clout to do anything about it, other than to piss and moan.

[makattak]

Rome and Greece didn't last forever either.

Rome lasted for between 1500 to 2000 years*. That's pretty amazingly long and we're barely 10% of that.


(*I hold that the Byzantines were actually Rome as well. If you don't think that, we're still talking 1000 years. 600 as the major world power. We're at about 70 years as that?)

[brimic]

Both of ours.

No, matter how one pisses and moans about changes, nothing stays static forever.

Also most of us on here don't have the political clout to do anything about it, other than to piss and moan.

Corruption and evil always creep in and rot  societies from the inside out.
Political clout? No, somedude a long time ago said something like 'democracies last until someone figures out how to vote themselves other peoples' money.' Not much any single person can do about that.
OTOH, nothing in washington will directly affect your community when it falls or loses legitimacy. Every single person has a duty to stand up to evil in their own community and keep it viable. There are some places that are lost causes- mainly population centers over 100,000 where decadence and hubris are the rule, not the exception, but then again, every individual has the right to choose where they live and who they associate with, there are consequences, many not readily apparent, to each of these choices.