Thursday, February 05, 2009

A Need of a Constitutional Convention?

Am I coming around to the idea that we need a Constitutional Convention? The answer is yes I am. As I look at the political scene and then look at the Constitution I see a government nothing like the one that was to be our heritage. As I see it, the government we have can fit neither of the interpretations of the Constitution. We have become a nation ruled by men not a nation ruled by law as intended and those men number nine.

When it gets to the point where one judge will look to the laws of other nations to determined the constitutionality of an issue, that is not allowing the Constitution determine its righteousness. That is men determining its righteousness. When a judge comes out and says that an issue is constitutional today but may not be constitutional tomorrow, that is not allowing the Constitution to settle the matter. That is men settling the matter as he sees that it should be not as the Constitution declaring how men should see it.

When you see a right given to the people and it cannot be defended by the words of the Constitution, such as the second amendment, then you have a right that has lost its meaning, constitutionally wise. When you have people espousing the idea that their political beliefs are to be separated from their religious beliefs, that is ideology speaking not the Constitution telling them that.

The Constitution is a very unique document. It separated the powers of the federal government from the state governments very clearly. The tenth amendment was to be the protection of this separation of powers. If one examines this document they would see something that truly is unique. The Constitution gives the federal government authority over all issues outside of the borders of the states. The state governments were given sole authority over all issues within their borders.

We have a governmental system that nobody is pleased with. There are those who would have a smaller government on the premise that it interferes into the lives of its citizens too much. There are those who would seek to have government play a bigger role in the lives of its citizens. Compromise is to blame for the end result that we see in government today. It will also be compromise that will lead us to our downfall as a nation and a State.

The Constitution is a contract, a contract that each member of that contract agreed to abide by the terms outlined in that document. As with any contract, it should be seen in the light of understanding of its originators. That is contract law and the reason that contracts should be written rather than oral. As with any contract, when the terms of that contract has been compromised to the point that it no longer can be seen as the original agreement of the parties involved then a new contract should be written.

There are those who see the Constitution as being a “living” document. That is a false perception of it. A living document would be a perfect document which would address the needs of a nation or State whether, past, present or future without the need of change. Only God could create a document that met that criteria and the Constitution was written by imperfect men not God.

If the founding fathers understood the need of a new Constitution then we who inherited their legacy should understand the need also when it can no longer address the needs of a nation. A Constitution that has two opposing sides to its understanding no longer rules a nation. For both are trying to impose a viewpoint in opposition to each other rather than allowing the Constitution to guide them in unity.


Average American said...

Griper, I have to take issue with you on this one. I would much rather maintain the status quo and work to get back to where the constitution requires we be than to trust today's politicians to rewrite it. Can you just imagine what we would end up with? I can guarantee it would not be recognizable.

The Griper said...

one problem with your solution, AA. if we cannot trust the politicians to rewrite it, how can we trust them to take us back where it requires us to be? i also can't see the average citizen prepared to accept the consequences of it either. think of all the things that the citizen would have to give up in order for us to get to that mode of government that the Constitution requires it to be.

statusquobuster said...

The Founders fully anticipated that we would have to amend (not rewrite) the Constitution. The real scandal is that Congress has refused to obey Article V that gives us the right to a convention of state delegates to consider proposals for amendments (that still must be ratified by 3/4 of states). There is only one national, nonpartisan group with the goal of making Congress give us a convention, because there have been over 700 applications from all 50 states for a convention, far more than the 2/3 of states required. Go to to learn all the facts and become a member.

Gayle said...

I don't trust today's politicians to rewrite it either, Griper, not politicians on either side of the aisle. I think any changes felt necessary because of the changing times should be done through amendments too.

Anonymous said...

we are in need of a new congress!

The Griper said...

what value would amendments have if the Constitution has already been made useless by government not abiding by them now? and if we could trust that politicians could write an amendment that would be abided by then why can't we trust them to give us a new Constitution that would be abided by as the founding fathers tried to do when they rewrote it?

The Griper said...

what we need is consistency in government not promises that can't and won't be kept, Bob. each and every member of government takes an oath to abide by the Constitution, yet very few even try to keep that oath.

Karen Howes said...

I agree with most of what you write here, Griper, except for rewriting the Constitution-- the amendment process is supposed to address new issues/concerns that the Constitution doesn't mention.

The problem isn't the Constitution-- it's the self-serving, incompetent members of Congress and the activist judges who ignore it. And it's us for not kicking their @$es out.

The Griper said...

you're right, karen, the amendment process was put in to address new issues/concerns not addressed already. we are speaking of old issues that it does address but is rendered useless now.

BB-Idaho said...

After reviewing all the constitutions of every country in the world I find that ours is
pretty good. (Just kidding, I ran out of steam by the time I got to

The Griper said...

i agree with you BB, it is a good Constitution but so was the Articles of Confederation a very good Constitution. the problem is not in the Constitution itself but in abiding by its principles.

when the needs of society or someone's perception of that need is the determinant of how it is to be read and interpreted, that in itself guarantees it will not be followed as it was meant to be followed.

it is a very clearly written document just as the Articles of Confederation was. it didn't contain any errors either. they just found out that men wouldn't abide by its principles either so they created another one to take its place.

they were just wise enough to know that it was needed and thus did it before any real damage could be done beyond what was already done.

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

what we need is consistency in government not promises that can't and won't be kept, Bob. each and every member of government takes an oath to abide by the Constitution, yet very few even try to keep that oath.

When an oath is sworn to defend the Constitution of the U.S., perhaps it should also be a requirement that the individual has proven himself to have read it? Understanding it, of course, would be another matter....

The Griper said...

if you ever notice Word, the only time they show concern about the Constitution is when they are questioning nominees to the Court. the questioning, more than likely, will center around ideological principles rather than Constitutional principles. this only affirms that, to politicians, ideology trumps the Constitution in how this nation is ruled.

Judge Brennan said...

Convention USA is an interactive virtual Article V constitutional convention on the Internet. All you folks who have opinions about what the constitution should or should not say are welcome to join us. It's time to stop just griping about our government. It's time to take action.


Words of Wisdom of my visitors

Grab This Widget

Gas Buddy

Search for gas prices by US Zip Code


Design by Amanda @ Blogger Buster