Strict Constructionism

I don’t understand the reason to be a Constitution thumper like some of our current representatives and senators. How can a person create a set of laws and expect them to be timeless? I believe that there are certain standards that the framers created for a reason, and to have a long lasting impact (like the bill of rights, duh), but there are those who go to the far right, and claim that there should be no wars because there is no mention of foreign policy in the Constitution (Ahem, Ron Paul). I am a firm believer of the power of the Constitution, and that it was meant to be timeless, in that it would adapt with time.Now, for a butchered analogy; people read Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, is considered to be a timeless classic piece of literature; in that it grasps the struggles of boyhood and racism. Now, that same book, a hundred years later, does not have the same impact, but it can be related and adapted to our generation and it’s culture. The framers did not have to deal with nuclear power, nor did they know what that was; they did not know about green technology or global warming; they hardly considered the Middle East to be an ally but rather nothing but a trading centre.

Our everyday issues can be applied to the laws that were written over 200 years ago, but still, to have that be a main source of argument is faulty and lacking.

end rant.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s