Is the US Constitution outdated?
This is an interesting question. Jefferson thought that to prevent the Constitution from going out of date there should be a Constitutional Convention every 20 years or so. Needless to say, there hasn't been a convention since his time. There are some people who have been calling for a new Constitutional Convention to either revise the current one or write a brand new one. Several areas of the world have had or are holding constitutional conventions--Iraq, the EU, and other places among them. I think there is a need for such a convention in the US, but there are many barriers and fears. Some feel the present one should be left alone--it's currently the longest enduring contract in the world, so maybe don't touch it. Other people feel--well, it's broken and time to fix it. Other people wonder who meets--current Congress (that would just make matters worse), an independent group of citizens (who selects them?), etc. What is going to be retained and what thrown out? Many people may agree that the electoral college method of selecting presidents should be thrown out in favor of direct election. But what about gun control? What about all the current issues that affect us? Some people think that if we held a convention, we would either get bogged down in a ten-year struggle that would get nowhere, or that we'd further tear the country apart. I think that what we need is a great man who proposes a new constitution and persuades the people to support it. But there are no great men on the current political scene, no George Washingtons or Thomas Jeffersons. All the current crop of politicians are hacks and wimps (or crooks).
What is the best constitution in the world?
Constitution can be classified into two types depending upon its nature of inception one is codified other one is uncodified. The former being written while the latter being unwritten.There are presently 180 countries in the world with codified constitution while the rest are uncodified.The country of USA has the oldest constitution in the world which was rattified on the year 1788 AD & is a codified constitution.While U. K. being one of the oldest countries in the world & the initial forebearers of constitutional laws through the enactment of Magna Carta on 1215 AD containing a compilation of rights & liberties, yet it doesn't have a codified constitution.Its Parliament is considered to be the implicit source of law-making power & at times source of all conflicts since exact limits to power is not explicitly defined.The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSK) on other hand declares Quran to be its constitution.Different constitution in the world were enacted at different points of time depending upon different socio-political scenarios prevalent at that time.The term constitution stands for:“ A body of Fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a State or Organisation will be governed”Now during the enactment of constitution in any country there was a fundamental principle which was reason behind such ratification or to be precise the ‘ mother of all causes’ which wasn't always explicit by nature but the framers had it in their minds during such promulgation.U. S. A. - Fundamental Rights, Independence of judiciary & Supreme court.U. K. - Parliamentary form of government & nominal head of government.U. S. S. R. - Fundamental duties & five year plans.CANADA- Federal form of governance including distribution of powers between Centre & federation.IRELAND - Directive Principles of the State influenced from the Irish Home Rule movement.Now regarding India the constitution of the country is the amalgamation of all these features which has been blended perfectly to a unique flavor of its own catering to needs & desires of every segment of the society.Thus undoubtedly it is the best constitution of the world.
What is the best amendment to the U.S. Constitution? Why is it considered the best?
The Second, of course.Without it, there is no way to guarantee that the Government will remember it is the servant to the People, and not the master.Any and all of the other enumerated Rights Guaranteed by the US Constitution are in grave jeopardy if the People cannot keep the Government in check. With an armed People, willing and ready to defend all of the Freedoms guaranteed by the US Constitution, the Government cannot stand if it tries to take control.Without the threat of an armed people, your First Amendments are out the window. As soon as the Government “decides”, for example, that we cannot peaceably assemble, or that it doesn’t like Moslems, Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews or Mormons, or that Free-Speech is hurtful and therefore needs to be limited, so that no one is “bullied” in school or online. Or that it doesn’t like the Huffington Post, CNN, The NY Times and the LA Times, so it bans a Free-Press, as it is dangerous to allow “unfettered and seditious” thoughts to be spread.The Second Amendment is a guarantee that the future, no matter what it brings, will keep the People in control, and not an oppressive, distant and unresponsive Government, obsessed with order and safety (of the leaders, not the People).This is why I like the Second Amendment. Without it, none of the others will matter anyway.
What do you think of the Constitution? 10pts for best answer?
The original Constitution may have been "flawed" but it's still a lot better than what we have now. The basic tenet of the Charter is justice, not equity, as what is fair is not always just but what is just is always fair. It's impossible to claim Bush has trashed the Constitution without believing Lincoln did the same. The question of slavery, which could not be resolved at the Convention, was eventually settled. The Constitution sets the parameters for the course necessary to obtain the ideals set forth in the Charter. The fact that certain self-evident and inalienable rights had to explicitly be written into the Constitution speaks to the Founders concerns that they would not be self-evident nor indeed inalienable to some. Habeas corpus is explicitly defined in the Constitution as a privilege which can be suspended under defined circumstances. The Democrats have offered for President a Constitutional "scholar" who actually describes habeas corpus as a right, who fails to acknowledge that some warrantless searches are "reasonable" and refuses to accept that there are circumstances where "exceptions" to a trial do indeed exist and who has consistantly failed to support his constituent's right to self-defense. A simple reading of the document proves he is no expert. If you wholeheartedly support a majority's right to rule as it sees fit you must be wholeheartedly willing to accept becoming a slave. This is the reason the Charter bestows no special right to a majority to interfere with actual rights. "If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind." John Stuart Mill
Why is US constitution the best written document?
I am going to debate about how the US document is the best document ever written. My opponents need to disprove this; they also have the easier part as they can use any document in history to prove their point that the US constitution is the NOT the best. (I also do not know which documents they are using.) What is good counters for the cons? The cons include: -slavery was allowed -exclusion of women -vague=many interpretations -bearing arms right
Would the US Constitution be the best form of one world government?
The US form of government is actually about the worst form of democratic government!Of all of the countries that have used the US system the USA is the only one that has made it work for more than 100 years - all of the others crashed and burnedThey gridlocked, then ended up with a Strong Man dictator then chaosIt’s actually not very surprising - the US system is specifically designed NOT TO WORKThe USA started out with a system with no federal powers at all - which immediately failedThen the founding committee worked out a minimal government - they spent most of their time working on ways to stop it functioning!This was not silly as the intention was that the States would be the main governing entities with the Federal Government as a limited body just to do the things that the states couldn’tParliamentary systems work a lot better - which is why most democracies use a parliamentary systemA top level world parliament would probably be about the best model but that would not work until the citizens of the world become a bit more equal in economic power
For Americans: Do you believe that the U.S. Constitution is the best on Earth? If so, have you actually read the Constitution of any other nation?
The United States Constitution deserves the reverence accorded it. But the founders did not walk on the waters and see into the future. They had to unite the states in a way that would hopefully assure the survival of the states in a world of at least 3 known world powers bent on empire while at the same time appeasing the southern states regarding slavery. It may well be that the antislavery founders believed that the slaves would gain rights without abrupt emancipation so as to preserve the union and that along with the recognition of rights the institution of slavery would morph into indentured servitude that would not survive through generations. There may have been other supposed/imagined futures at work. But the concept of state sovereignty was the price paid for the a “more perfect union” of the states. We are still stuck with it.The US Constitution is, in all likelihood, not the best that can be, nor is any other constitution. The primary failing of the original constitution at the time of its creation was the sovereignty of the states and it is reflected most abundantly in Article V. Not only does Article V entrench the constitution in a way that makes it almost impossible to improve and update, the text itself proclaims the equal representation of the states in the government (the very backbone of state power) and this cannot be altered by amendment regardless of whether the state governments or the people want it. That leaves us with the choice of a new constitution or a return to the Articles of Confederation (which would also be a new constitution).
What are the greatest weaknesses in the US constitution?
The greatest weakness is it's ability to be interpreted pretty much how the current society wants to interpret it. Which, when you think about it, is caused by the weaknesses in government and society as a whole. Let's take the separation of church and state as an example. The founding fathers promoted the separation of the two institutions as an attempt to keep government from excercising any control over a person's freedom of religion. Remember, our country was founded by people wanting to excercise different religions. Depending on where you were in Europe, you had to be either Catholic and subject to the Pope, or Protestant, depending on the political climate. The two were intertwined to the point that being the wrong religion was treason. Here, there was supposed to be a freedom to fully embrace your religious practices and to include them in your daily life. But over time, the Establishment clause has been bullied, beaten up and bloodied to the point where it has been completely reversed. Now, the constitution is being used to keep religion out of government. That WAS NOT what the writers of the constitution were trying to do. That is evidenced by the inclusion of God in our money, pledge, and even the oaths that were always taken with your hand on the bible. So I think it is sad that certain factions use the constitution in a way that it was never intended to be used, and I think it sadder still that our current government and society allows it.
Is the American Constitution flawless?
No it is not flawless, it recognizes the need to be changed by an amendment process.The U.S. Constitution along with its predecessor Declaration of Independence of the United States are exceptional. They recognize natural rights and the sovereignty of man, capable to “overthrowing unjust government”.No other organizing documents recognize the bottoms up revolutionary nature of this government. That makes them exceptional.