Thursday, August 14, 2008
Preserving the original intent of the constitution
How can the original intent be preserved. Over time, words get re-defined, populations change their ideas of what their society wants, and pressure is applied to license criminality despite the altruistic intent of the authors.
Words redefined: Being aware of this, the writers of the constitution would specify the dictionary used to check the definitions. reference could be made to treatises that explain the background of the constitution although there would then be argument to include that in the document!
Changing of ideas: There are core values that a society hold that should not change. The constitution should only be addressing core, unchangeable values. But if the ground rock of society does change, the constitution would have to stand as a guide to those who have made the change and act as a reference point. Anything that is wholly wrong would be obvious against the truth of the constitution
practicing License: People should be courageous enough and of a strong will enough to counter the criminal intent. If the people who are of the constitution of mind enough to protect their integrity, then the criminal will have a hard time of it and hopefully be shunned and ignored ever-after as the blackguard they are for forwarding their own self-interest.
Words redefined: Being aware of this, the writers of the constitution would specify the dictionary used to check the definitions. reference could be made to treatises that explain the background of the constitution although there would then be argument to include that in the document!
Changing of ideas: There are core values that a society hold that should not change. The constitution should only be addressing core, unchangeable values. But if the ground rock of society does change, the constitution would have to stand as a guide to those who have made the change and act as a reference point. Anything that is wholly wrong would be obvious against the truth of the constitution
practicing License: People should be courageous enough and of a strong will enough to counter the criminal intent. If the people who are of the constitution of mind enough to protect their integrity, then the criminal will have a hard time of it and hopefully be shunned and ignored ever-after as the blackguard they are for forwarding their own self-interest.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
How do you preserve the original intent? Is there some guideline to do this or a means to get there? Who determines if an action is off the line of intention for the constitution? How can you tell? Is it the job of the President? The Judiciary? The legislature?
To a degree you can view the preamble to the constitution as the touchstone from which all should follow. What other way is there?
To a degree you can view the preamble to the constitution as the touchstone from which all should follow. What other way is there?
Monday, August 11, 2008
It is often useful to go back to the basics. To contact the fundamentals on which the later parts are built. Here I am referring to the need of having a constitution at all. After all, there is an unwritten one which seems to have worked well for the UK although the Magna Carta is the written document that puts in a lot of basic premises.
It seems that the rule of law is important as that is the application of force that is needed to ensure that civil behaviour continues. But the rule of law operates on the written law and precedent. And that is the achilles heel as the law can then be altered and changed by a process of redefinition of the terms in the law so as to make it a mockery of the original intention.
How do you preserve the original intent?
It seems that the rule of law is important as that is the application of force that is needed to ensure that civil behaviour continues. But the rule of law operates on the written law and precedent. And that is the achilles heel as the law can then be altered and changed by a process of redefinition of the terms in the law so as to make it a mockery of the original intention.
How do you preserve the original intent?
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Is it right to give someone immunity to prosecution if they are caught spying on you? Or if it is found the drug they developed and marketed was known to have bad side-effects?
There is ethical behaviour based on: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Ergo, we should insist on being able to view the emails and listen to phone calls of the telecom execs who approved the tapping of our phones and viewing of our emails, and also make them feed the dangerous medicines to their kids and themselves. But that would be immoral of us because we threaten the lives of innocent children. But the perpetrator is morally obliged to take his own medicine ..... and should be pressured to do so to see what their reaction is.
How can this be arranged?
There is ethical behaviour based on: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Ergo, we should insist on being able to view the emails and listen to phone calls of the telecom execs who approved the tapping of our phones and viewing of our emails, and also make them feed the dangerous medicines to their kids and themselves. But that would be immoral of us because we threaten the lives of innocent children. But the perpetrator is morally obliged to take his own medicine ..... and should be pressured to do so to see what their reaction is.
How can this be arranged?
