Should It Be So Difficult To Amend The Constitution?

[Revoltingest]

Acceptance nor recognition are required.
These are just competing systems. The Islamic one uses a divine clause. Socialist nations make it up as they go along.

My examples show that there are no universally recognized rights..

 

[Shad]

My examples show that there are no universally recognized rights..

I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about rights which require no government nor external person to create which any individual can exercise. Consensus is not required.

 

[Revoltingest]

I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about rights which require no government nor external person to create which any individual can exercise. Consensus is not required.

It sounds like you define which rights are rights,
& that your definition rules. Other people have
other ideas.

 

[Shad]

It sounds like you define which rights are rights & that your definition rules.

Nope. Just observations.

Other people have
other ideas.

Sure competing ideas exist.

 

[joe1776]

The Blackstone approach is not taken literally.

You're wrong. Miranda, the fifth amendment, right not to testify and a long list of the rules of evidence are based on Blackstone.

I like the "innocent until proven guilty" philosophy.

So do I. That's not Blackstone. That's just fair.

Corrupt prosecutors, lawyers, & judges should be found, prosecuted, & severely punished.

Why not just eliminate the problem with a system that makes cheating to get convictions of the guilty unnecessary?

But we've a problem where the foxes are in charge of the hen house.

You mean lawyers? I'm open to suggestion. What group do you think it would take to unravel a constitutional legal mess besides lawyers?

I don't trust government with more power than they already have.

And you assume that the solution to a screwed up system would give the government more power without knowing what the solution would be?

Bottom line: You either don't see the US Criminal Justice System as a screwed up mess or you aren't willing to admit that the Constitution is an obstruction in the solving of the problem.

 

[Revoltingest]

You're wrong. Miranda, the fifth amendment, right not to testify and a long list of the rules of evidence are based on Blackstone.

The Miranda ruling is not quantitative.
It's also necessitated by the propensity of cops to coerce false confessions.

Why not just eliminate the problem with a system that makes cheating to get convictions of the guilty unnecessary?

How would that be achieved?

You mean lawyers? I'm open to suggestion. What group do you think it would take to unravel a constitutional legal mess besides lawyers?

It's problematic that lawyers & judges are disciplined by their own.
We could perhaps have an independent system to monitor & sanction them.

And you assume that the solution to a screwed up system would give the government more power without knowing what the solution would be?

I didn't assume that.

Bottom line: You either don't see the US Criminal Justice System as a screwed up mess or you aren't willing to admit that the Constitution is an obstruction in the solving of the problem.

Neither option.

 

[fantome profane]

It's problematic that lawyers & judges are disciplined by their own.
We could perhaps have an independent system to monitor & sanction them.

Made up of who? Who would monitor and sanction lawyers if not other lawyers?

 

[Revoltingest]

Made up of who? Who would monitor and sanction lawyers if not other lawyers?

Engineers, of course.

 

[allfoak]

It does get amended regularly.

But if one assumes that the Bible is handed down from God,
then amending it is inappropriate. The Constitution is different
though, being a creation of humans.

Aye.

The constitution is based on the same laws of which the universe is governed.
While it is written by humans,changing it changes its validity.

 

[fantome profane]

The constitution is based on the same laws of which the universe is governed.
While it is written by humans,changing it changes its validity.

Are you serious?

 

[Revoltingest]

The constitution is based on the same laws of which the universe is governed.
While it is written by humans,changing it changes its validity.

Where would one find the source for these laws governing the universe?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I said regardless of culture. At an individual level we all have freedom of thought.

Probably not as much as you'd think...even our thought processes are shaped immensely by the environment in which we were nurtured. This is as true in matters of political philosophy as it is in matters of religion. As Francis Xavier, the Jesuit founder, said..."give me the child until he is 7, and I will give you the man."

I cannot tell you how often I have seen people with fixed ideas presented with absolutely irrefutable evidence for something which they'd rather not believe, and observed how they cannot even bring themselves to look at it, much less be influenced by it. In this way, they do not have freedom of thought...that was constrained in certain ways long before they needed it.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about rights which require no government nor external person to create which any individual can exercise. Consensus is not required.

Could you provide some examples of what those rights which require no government nor external person to create, and which any individual can exercise? I only ask because it seems pretty clear to me that any "government," possessing untrammelled governmental authority, could deny any such "right."

What I am trying to suggest is that things like bills of rights are a deliberate attempt to curtail the power of government to interfere in ordinary human life in certain ways. Thus, whether it's complete or not, or correct or not, the US Bill of Rights enshrined in amendments 3 thru 12 seem to me a really admirable attempt by governments to curtail their own power over individuals -- even when rabid majorities try to insist!!

 

[allfoak]

Where would one find the source for these laws governing the universe?

Inside of yourself.
I know it sounds crazy but this country did not become great by accident.
The founding fathers of this country were enlightened people.
Do you really think we brought all of the races together in one place just for kicks?
They understood the dynamics that would play out as a result. They were so convinced of their understanding of the laws that run the universe that the black race were brought here against their will.
I guess everyone thinks that we were just evil people looking for slaves.
That could not be farther from the truth. There were laws at work that allowed for something like that to happen.It was a fulfillment of karmic debt.
Those that wrote the constitution understood this and much more that has since been lost by those governing this country today.
Changes to the constitution should never be made without the consensus of the people in this country.

 

[allfoak]

Are you serious?

Yup

 

[Revoltingest]

Changes to the constitution should never be made without the consensus of the people in this country.

On this much we agree.

 

[allfoak]

On this much we agree.

I'm glad you found something we can agree on. I understand that the things I say are difficult to accept as even remotely true. I don't mind so much anymore. Used to be I would spend endless hours mostly miserable hours trying to get people to see things my way. I have since learned that it is not supposed to be that way.
Regardless of what people disagree with or agree upon, the processing is different for everyone and it always becomes something different than it was originally. This is normal. We are all different and will stay that way.

 

[Revoltingest]

I understand that the things I say are difficult to accept as even remotely true. I don't mind so much anymore. Uaes to be I would spend endless hours mostly miserable hours trying to get people are things my way. I have since learned that it is not supposed to be that way.
Regardless of what people disagree with or agree upon, the processing is different for everyone and it always becomes something different than it was originally. This is normal. We are all different and will stay that way.

I see this natural law stuff as neither true nor untrue.
It's just not verifiable.
(You know....not even wrong.)

 

[allfoak]

I see this natural law stuff as neither true nor untrue.
It's just not verifiable.
(You know....not even wrong.)

It is verifiable.
Its just that the tests are not done with physical materials but rather with the things of spirit.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is verifiable.
Its just that the tests are not done with physical materials but rather with the things of spirit.

Sounds like belief without testability.