General Discussion

2naSalit

(102,616 posts)

28. I disagree on this point...

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 12:13 PM

Apr 2016

We can't go by what what debated in the so-called Constitutional Convention... only what was approved and sent to the states.

Actually, we do that quite often and most particularly within federal courts because these are predominantly Constitutional arguments. Interpretation is what has to take place regularly, if that were not the case, unjust laws or laws whose implementation produced undesired effects would never be re-examined or rescinded/overturned... ever. Interpretation includes understanding the origin of a thing... the Constitution was and is still in the process of being written and it is argued about on a daily basis throughout the nation because it is not stone tablets hewn on the mountain. That, in itself, was the intent of the founders for us to continue the conversation as we evolve as a nation. Without going by what was argued in the past, we have little in reference as to what we are to do in keeping our democracy functioning.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

72 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is a democracy legitimate if votes don't weigh the same? [View all] eniwetok Mar 2016 OP

Are you looking to do away with the Senate? dogman Mar 2016 #1

are you suggesting the senate is morally illegitimate? eniwetok Mar 2016 #5

They are not proportional to population. dogman Mar 2016 #8

so antidemocratic government is about morality? eniwetok Mar 2016 #12

I guess your question would be to the founders. dogman Mar 2016 #13

given us? eniwetok Mar 2016 #14

We would probably still be a colony. dogman Mar 2016 #15

missing the point eniwetok Mar 2016 #16

limiting the power of the minority eniwetok Apr 2016 #17

Is the Senate constitutional? WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #34

of course it's "constitutional" eniwetok Apr 2016 #38

Not so sure 'bout that. WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #41

the problem with ANY reformulation of the EC eniwetok Apr 2016 #43

I'm with you. The Senate is an abomination. Does America look like Chicago, represented by 2 WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #44

So, less populous states are now Bettie Apr 2016 #60

Keep the Senate... but base it on national proportional representation eniwetok Apr 2016 #48

Votes in swing states weigh more than non swing states too Rebkeh Mar 2016 #2

isn't it odd... eniwetok Mar 2016 #6

In 2012, 66 million voted for Obama and 61 million for Romney. Nye Bevan Mar 2016 #3

that's the problem with... eniwetok Mar 2016 #7

There is no solution to that, because there is no other way a government could work. potone Mar 2016 #10

Its called a Eko Mar 2016 #4

as opposed to... eniwetok Apr 2016 #22

a democracy. Eko Apr 2016 #26

It depends on what you are talking about. potone Mar 2016 #9

no other interests... eniwetok Mar 2016 #11

We are the 'United States', not 'America'. X_Digger Apr 2016 #54

lol tymorial Apr 2016 #59

RED HERRING ALERT!! eniwetok Apr 2016 #63

If you look into the deliberations forming the Constitution 1939 Apr 2016 #19

Much was debated eniwetok Apr 2016 #21

I disagree on this point... 2naSalit Apr 2016 #28

and the federalist papers... eniwetok Apr 2016 #31

I look at it in a different light I guess 2naSalit Apr 2016 #33

no progress the past 225 years? eniwetok Apr 2016 #37

Hmmm 2naSalit Apr 2016 #39

In our system apathy is not an unreasonablel response. eniwetok Apr 2016 #46

---unreasonable--- 2naSalit Apr 2016 #49

I meant unreasonable... eniwetok Apr 2016 #50

If the constitution were 'reformproof' we wouldn't be up to #28 for the next one. X_Digger Apr 2016 #55

here's the amendment breakdown... eniwetok Apr 2016 #64

I would submit 1939 Apr 2016 #72

no key reforms in 225 years eniwetok Apr 2016 #47

I remember Al Gore having more votes than Bush. Should the Electoral College be done away B Calm Apr 2016 #18

the EC is an antidemocratic abomination eniwetok Apr 2016 #20

Let's ask Socrates. Act_of_Reparation Apr 2016 #23

it's called the senate. nt La Lioness Priyanka Apr 2016 #24

So is this one of those threads where we answer questions with questions? Iggo Apr 2016 #25

One group of 1,000 voters gets counted as 1,000 votes, another group of 1,000 counts as 900 .... L. Coyote Apr 2016 #27

voter suppression is different from... eniwetok Apr 2016 #35

Learn a little about basic government and get back with us. Rex Apr 2016 #29

really? eniwetok Apr 2016 #30

how many other nations have our system? eniwetok Apr 2016 #40

Republicans would be the Green Party if it was one person one vote Democat Apr 2016 #32

some numbers: votes vs senate seats eniwetok Apr 2016 #36

It loses some legitimacy, but not all of it. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2016 #42

what remains morally legitimate? eniwetok Apr 2016 #45

The US is a rigged manipulated democracy and the highest bidder wins. And some of it is obsolete, RKP5637 Apr 2016 #51

yup... a cat fight eniwetok Apr 2016 #53

Thank you for your astute reply! n/t RKP5637 Apr 2016 #70

If we didn't have a bicameral legislature then yes tymorial Apr 2016 #52

so bicameral means it MUST be antidemocratic? eniwetok Apr 2016 #56

Your concept is preposterous tymorial Apr 2016 #58

No, YOUR concept is preposterous eniwetok Apr 2016 #61

You mean like how the vote of someone in wymoing is way more proportionally powerful in the Senate Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #57

we're only stuck with it if... eniwetok Apr 2016 #62

If I wasn't capable of "questioning" it, I wouldn't have mentioned it. Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #65

the bar is insanely high eniwetok Apr 2016 #66

it is important to remember, absolutely. And I'm all for pointing it out. Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #67

I hope you're wrong eniwetok Apr 2016 #68

There is a logistical process to changing the constitution, though, that goes beyond simply changing Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #69

what I'm saying eniwetok Apr 2016 #71