Constitutionalist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-09-2010, 05:49 PM
RE: Constitutionalist
(01-09-2010 05:32 PM)2buckchuck Wrote:  Personally, I find it somewhat insulting to categorize myself in such a simple diagram. I think human beings are more complex than this simple 2-dimensional categorization attempts to show.

Hey, man, it's just for fun. Lighten up! Big Grin

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2010, 05:50 PM
RE: Constitutionalist
(01-09-2010 05:04 PM)BarleyMcFlexo Wrote:  
(01-09-2010 03:05 PM)Soldieringon Wrote:  I'm looking at all of these charts (mine included) and finding that most of us seem to lean into the left lower quadrant.

Guess where I fall on the chart Wink I took the test and saved the image to my hard drive, but realized I can't link to it (unless someone tells me how?)

Anyway, I was 5 squares to the right, and 1 square up.

You can either right-click the image immediately after taking the test and click "Copy Image URL" or do this:

[Image: pcgraphpng.php?ec=5.00&soc=1.00]

I messed with the url of another image. The position of the dot is determined by some numerical values in the address of the image.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2010, 09:56 PM
 
RE: Constitutionalist
OK - I took the stupid test. I deny any meaning associated with the result but here it is ...

   
Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2010, 07:27 AM
RE: Constitutionalist
I'm too sexy to post my results (that, and I also can't figure out how to do it)

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2010, 03:10 PM
RE: Constitutionalist
[Image: pcgraphpng.php?ec=-9.25&soc=-6.41]

(31-08-2010 07:01 PM)Green Wrote:  I can certainly see my affinity for social programs comes from being a Canadian what with our health care and whatnot... I've always been a supporter of the under privileged and the welfare state so long as it is regulated and seen to that receivers of such support are actively making an effort to supplant government support with their own money.

Ditto. Yay for being Canadian Tongue

"Remember, my friend, that knowledge is stronger than memory, and we should not trust the weaker." - Dr. Van Helsing, Dracula
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2010, 03:45 PM
 
RE: Constitutionalist
(01-09-2010 11:06 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(01-09-2010 10:04 AM)dtwpuck Wrote:  Agreed. No document can cover every possible scenario. Words change meaning, situations change, life happens. A consititution is, for all practical purposes, a guideline.

Yep. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't at least take its advice on certain situations.

. . . that's about all a Constitutionalist needs to be - a person who thinks that the Constitution is a good thing. Smile

No one disputes that we should take its advice. But just try defifning objectively what situations should or should not qualify. Now try defining what that advice is exactly. It's all subject to interpretation. Law, like the the bible, or ethics is very much a subjective undertaking.

Good, bad... even saying 'the consistution is good' is a subjective statement. Yeah, well the constitution once was used to justify slavery. Good?
Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2010, 02:11 PM
 
RE: Constitutionalist
As someone said before, the Constitution was a compromise. The Founding Fathers had significantly different opinions on what the government should 'look like' (especially Jefferson and Hamilton).

Personally, I'd describe myself as a Progressive Democrat, but a center-left one in practice.


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   
Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2010, 03:16 PM
RE: Constitutionalist
Quote:Good, bad... even saying 'the consistution is good' is a subjective statement. Yeah, well the constitution once was used to justify slavery. Good?

At the risk of being the obnoxious lawyer/semantic police, I feel the need to point out that this is not true. Not because I want to show up dtwpuck (that's just an added benefit!) but to make the point that there are a lot of common misconceptions about the US Constitution.

Btw, and for the record, the Constitution originally said nothing about slavery except to say that 3/5 of the slave population would be counted towards determine the number of representatives the slave states received. This was later used to make the claim the Constitution recognized blacks as 3/5 of a human being, in an attempt to further show the immorality of what was already an indefensible institution. But, I digress....

The Constitution is a governmental framework. It sets forth certain floors and ceilings on government authority and establishes individual rights. It is not based on the bible, contrary to what some ridiculous number of Americans seem to think (and I think 1 person believing this nonsense is too many). The Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment makes it very, very clear that the US is not a Christian nation. It was certainly a nation established by Christians, but that is not nearly the same thing. It does not establish a given economic theory. Some of the stuff that gets thrown around would be hilarious if people were not getting elected espousing this crap.

But, what it is mostly is a document written by a bunch of rich, white, farmers who viewed women and any one not white as less than them and still only intended to put forth a government that was accountable to the general population and that could adapt over time. They were human beings with feet of clay, must like the rest of us, and generally speaking did not have any special wisdom or sagacity that the rest of us 21st century mortals do not have. They are worthy of our admiration for the risks they took to establish the first modern democracy but they are not worthy of our worship or our continued deference. We should learn from them but we are not required to follow their lead on every issue, partly because the world of 1789 was vastly different and party because they were all leading to different places.

Why there is a need to deify these people is beyond me. I revere Thomas Jefferson for being a man who was intellectually well ahead of his time but I equally recognize that he had many faults and was nothing more than a man, the same as any other man. I'm not making 21st century decisions based on his 18th century perspective and I can't believe anyone else would either.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2010, 06:33 PM
 
RE: Constitutionalist
I believe that slavery was such a divisive issue at a time when those advocating separation from England needed everyone on board, the Constitution was mostly silent about slavery. They needed all the colonies to have a chance to carry off the Revolutionary War. Had slavery been abolished, the South would never have joined the Union.

BnW has posted an outstanding, succinct discussion of the apparent 'deification' of our "founding fathers" - indeed, some on the religious right are re-writing history to make it seem as if our nation was founded as a christian nation. The founders were indeed humans, with flaws and internal contradictions, including slaveowner Jefferson. The Constitution, when combined with the Bill of Rights, is a remarkable blueprint for a constrained democracy - the founders justifiably feared the 'tyranny of the majority'. I like the metaphor about a democracy involving two wolves and a sheep - guess who gets to be dinner!

Like any human construct, it isn't perfect, but American democracy based on the Constitution and Bill of Rights has managed (at least to date) to survive with the rights of minorities more or less intact (if you ignore some really ugly things). We're still trying to live up to the ideals expressed in those documents ...
Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2010, 09:19 PM
RE: Constitutionalist
Well, the Constitution was written after the Revolutionary War was won and was not even the initial form of government in the US (that was the Articles of Confederation). But, you're comment that the original states all needed each other to be on board for this experiment to work is spot on and that's why the free states were willing to make that compromise.

Ok, I swear I'm going to stop correcting people on history now because I'm sure you're all getting sick of me doing it.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: