It has been debated endlessly whether the constitution should be read literally, contemporaneously, in reference to ____. Really, it was a fairly well put together document. Solid effort, gold stars all around. But, given its quality, the constitution has been difficult to pull away from.
If you’ve ever seen what a group of kids spontaneously untethered by the rules of a game decide to do, it might offer some perspective on the coming years
It has been debated endlessly whether the constitution should be read literally, contemporaneously, in reference to ____.
Here’s an easy flowchart for that:
Does the literal reading support the dismantlement of democracy and/or the implementation of a theocratic state? If yes, then it should be read literally. Otherwise no.
This. Simple as. It’s a common bad-faith debating technique called ‘saying whatever random-ass thing makes the stupid people listening think I am right’.
I realize the sarcasm, but this was a major point of contention for decades after the passing of the founding fathers, even without power grabs. Technically, every political move is a power grab, but still. There was previously more sincerity to the line of thought
It has been debated endlessly whether the constitution should be read literally, contemporaneously, in reference to ____. Really, it was a fairly well put together document. Solid effort, gold stars all around. But, given its quality, the constitution has been difficult to pull away from.
If you’ve ever seen what a group of kids spontaneously untethered by the rules of a game decide to do, it might offer some perspective on the coming years
I dunno, I’d dock a star for the 3/5ths bit
That wasn’t until many years later.
The 3/5ths Compromise was made just months before the Constitution was written, in 1787.
Not true. It was written into the constitution as ratified in 1789.
Here’s an easy flowchart for that:
Does the literal reading support the dismantlement of democracy and/or the implementation of a theocratic state? If yes, then it should be read literally. Otherwise no.
This. Simple as. It’s a common bad-faith debating technique called ‘saying whatever random-ass thing makes the stupid people listening think I am right’.
I realize the sarcasm, but this was a major point of contention for decades after the passing of the founding fathers, even without power grabs. Technically, every political move is a power grab, but still. There was previously more sincerity to the line of thought