Strict Constitutionalism
It is held by some that nothing should be read into the constitution which is not there. Period. Others argue that times change and the Constitution should too. Fine, say the former, but that requires a Constitutional Amendment. This sounds logical at first, but then we need remember that the Constitution is not about majority rule as King, but about a balance of powers with the Courts having a primary role of protecting individual rights.
We revere the ‘founding fathers’ of our country and it is well that we should. What they did is START a form of governance that unshackled people from Kings, dictators, and other such ilk, into governance based on responsibility to those governed—including minorities of all ilk. The best of men could hardly to be expected to create a perfect Constitution on the first try. To sort of deify these men we attribute all sorts of invented notions about them and their times.
Many colonists may have escaped Europe for religious freedom, but that is quite different from meaning they then established freedom of religion in the colonies they governed. In most cases they did not. The Puritans, for example, were hardly tolerant of differing religious beliefs. And the punishments were severe. Even Roger Williams, who was driven out of his community for his differing beliefs about his own religion, and then founded Rhode Island with a firm separation of church and state, was hardly tolerant of other religious beliefs. He wanted complete separation of Church and State because he wanted to be sure the State could not corrupt the pureness of his own beliefs.
The bill of Rights was inserted into the Constitution to protect the personal rights of the people. But we need be careful who ‘the people’ really were back then who were protected. They certainly were not the blacks. They certainly were not, in many respects, women. They certainly, in many respects, were not the non land-owning males. They certainly were not the Catholics or the Jews. These portions of ‘the people’ had to be included via constitutional amendments and Court decisions. I don’t personally have the legal background to explain the difference between a constitutional amendment and a change via Court decision. My impression is that the conservative right would say that change via Court decisions were wrong; that change has to come from Constitutional Amendments, not ‘revisionism’ of the existing Constitution.
HOWEVER, people’s rights cannot be determined by majority rule or the religious beliefs of some. At a given time, some may have had to sit in the back of the bus. Clearly those that did, did not have rights others had. To say majorities should always rule is to admit that some minorities may never gain rights others already have. For this to be true, the Golden Rule has to be trashed. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you would never allow anyone to grant a basic right to themselves which they are not willing to grant to others.
When the Constitution was first written it was pretty much land owning white male Protestants who were covered by the Bill of Rights. They were granted all sorts of privileges not granted to certain others at certain times and places in our history. Let us never use the present to twist the past. The early years of our country were ripe with laws and feelings against immigrants, blacks, women, Catholics, Jews, gays, and the poor. This list is probably not complete. It took time for fairness and the Golden Rule to weasel their way into our Constitutional law. There are many today who are still not too keen about immigrants, blacks, women, certain religious sects, gays, and the poor. Fortunately for these disliked groups the courts exist to protect them from majority abuse.
None of the above diminishes the respect anyone should have for the Founders of our country. They did good. Better than good. They started us down a path which gave power and protection to people——at least in theory. For us to make fun of them for any limitations would be no different than making fun of Henry Ford for his model T compared to the cars of today. The same holds true for trying to compare athletes of the past to today’s athletes. There is nothing to compare. In my short lifetime humans have gotten taller, stronger, and faster. That’s evolution. In my short lifetime more and more groups have gotten rights long denied. That’s evolution. In my life time, while the belief in God is mostly sustained, the notion that moral behavior is determined by inheritance and strict interpretations of inherited scriptures written ages ago by those who once knew a prophet of old is diminishing. That’s ethical evolution.
To declare the constitution a document etched in stone is as ludicrous as the phrase ‘History repeats itself’. Anyone with any remote knowledge of history knows ever so well that history does not very often repeat itself. Anyone who understands the important role change plays in the evolutionary process understands history does not repeat itself. Anyone who thinks the way to fight World War II is a blueprint for fighting wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, etc is, and was, in for a surprise. When conservatives say the old and tried ways of the past are always the best, this simply reveals the fatal flaw in their political and religious beliefs. The very word progress means change, and the goal is almost always to take a product of the past and make it even better today.
Naturally, all change is not better. Thus the question with any change is whether it is for the better or for the worse. The problem is, too many people view the answer to this purely on a self serving basis. When NFL owners and the labor union meet to work on contracts they could care less about anyone or anything except their own greed. When the wealthy use their wealth to push through Congress all kinds of tax cuts, tax shelters, tax exemptions, on and on, they could care less how this affects the non wealthy. Ironically, they are very short sighted. All this wealth they want comes off the backs of others. Since the poor are poor, this additional wealth can’t come from the poor, so it has to come from the middle class. When it comes from the middle class, this pushes more of the middle class into poverty. It has gotten so bad, this economic divide between the rich and the rest of society, that social and economic implosion is likely just around the corner.
Now that the Supreme Court has declared Corporations are people, a Corporation can use the money derived from the people to buy votes to get new laws, or sustain old laws, which enable them to corner even more of the national wealth. With this greedy mentality they are setting themselves up to be hung out to be dried. This is the stuff of which revolutions are made, and when revolutions happen, the Have’s, with so much to protect, lose to the Have Not’s with so little to protect. No society can last long with too much wealth accumulated in the hands of the wealthy. When enough is never enough, and Trump(y) greed rampant, the collapse is never far behind.
It is not the written Constitution which is etched in stone but the principles embodied in that wonderful document. These principles are human rights for all citizens, protection for all citizens, opportunity for all citizens, and respect for others. When the principles embodied in our constitution, and the universal moral principle of the Golden Rule prevail, there will be few people starving, few homeless, few persons dying from curable diseases, responsible reproduction accepted as a social responsibility, no religious wars, no capitalism without reasonable regulations and limits—and all of this is dependent on humans understanding when enough is enough in most every aspect of their life. There will never be equality of wealth, physical appearance, athletic ability, intelligence, fame, titles, etc because God’s evolutionary process depends on diversity to move forward. Humans have the innate ethical understanding to understand that we can individually, and collectively, make the playing field more level for the less fortunate, and when everything in this paragraph evolves to become reality, then maximum contentment will be achieved for the maximum number of people.
