Quote:
Originally posted by Bobo
I don't agree with that. If you replaced the Constitution whenever it was convenient you would have anarchy. It was meant, as Fletch stated, to be revised. The process of revision was purposefully made difficult to avoid having people come in and rewrite it when they believed it would suit their needs.
I'm not familiar with the French system, but I would venture to think each of their consitutions is closer to a revision rather than a complete rewrite of the previous ones.
|
Not whenever it was convenient. Whenever it was necessary. I think Jefferson is quoted as saying he expected it to last no more than a few decades. Yes, it was meant to be revised-- but after a certain amount of patching, you need to re-write from the ground up or you're left with hobbled-together crap.
As for the French Consitution... I think the people killed in France's many revolutions might disagree with you a bit. They have had upheaval. Not every time, but sometimes.
You do know, for instance, that there are exactly two reasons why the second amendment exists, right?
1.) To make it clear that people could have weapons to overthrow the English.
2.) So that people could do the same thing again later.
I'm not making this stuff up. You don't have to agree with any of my opinions, but that's the history of the document people (including me) hold so dear.