Their Bible, my Constitution

[Oeditpus Rex]

...and I just realized, it seems I tend to stand on the Constitution because... well, because it's the Constitution, dammit. But, I thought, how is that different from "Because it's in the Bible," which is no answer at all?

So I believe I shall become more critical of it.

What section(s) of the Constitution do you think should be questioned?

[ZombieNixon]

1. The 18th Amendment.

:+

:P

[Oeditpus Rex]

Yeah, how 'bout that one?

Oughta be repealed. x(

[Floogeldy]

2. Off the top of my head . . .

. . . the parts of the original Constitution subject to questioning were fixed by the 14th Amendment.

[NMMNG]

3. Referring to the Constitution has a bit more validity

than referring to the Bible. The Bible is merely a collection of writings by men that some consider a guide for their lives, and others consider a weapon. It came about through personal inspiration (or, as some believe, "divine inspiration") and is stagnant and unchangeable. The Constitution is a blueprint for our nation that came about through thought and debate between the Founding Fathers. Over the years it has proven amenable to refinement as the needs of our nation have changed. The two are very different animals.

[Oeditpus Rex]

4. Not in my analogy, they ain't

You're messing with my metaphors, Buffy. Please stop. :P




Although you're quite right.

[hfojvt]

5. "merely" and "stagnant"

value-laden terms there. Doubtless it is better for truth to constantly change so murder will be wrong for a few hundred years and then be okay for a couple decades, back and forth, depending on fashion or perhaps responding to population pressures. The constitution is not changing so much based on needs as it is based on goals - income tax and prohibition for example. Whatever its virtues for governance, it has not prevented slavery, imperialism, poverty, homicides and the largest prison population in the world. Then again, neither has the purported Christianity of our citizens either.