I got into an "exchange of ideas" at work the other day. And It prompted my next post on my blog.
I have heard people describe the United States Constitution as a "living breathing document". By this they mean the original intent of the drafters of the constitution was that the constitution be bend able, changeable to suit the ever changing tides of society.
I have a problem with this premise. I believe that the Constitution is there to protect us from tyranny. It is a document that was formed to limit the government from encroaching on what our forefathers believed to be unalienable rights.
Now I concede that sometimes change is needed. Not everything could have been foreseen. So, yes in a sense the Constitution is an ever evolving document. But to what extent should this be taken? My main concern here is the majority. Too many in this country think that the majority rules in every case. If the majority wants it....they should get it. If this were the case, you would have majority tyranny.
Let's take the freedom of speech for example. What if the majority in this country decided you can no longer openly criticize the President or something like that. Well, if the Constitution were truly a "living breathing" document, then they could do something like that. The Constitution should be solid. Should be there to protect the right to free speech, or right to bear arms, or whatever even if it's down to the last person who believes it anymore.
Some get so upset about prayer in schools. They get angry because one person can come in and have the court overrule the desires of the majority and ban a certain activity from a school just for one offended person. Now, I personally don't have a problem with prayer in schools-just for the record- but, sometimes we have to sacrifice the "wants" of the majority to protect the rights of the minority.
sigh...prayer in schools. I shouldn't have used that example. What a hornet's nest.
14 years ago
3 comments:
Good for you for having the guts to post something like this about prayer in schools.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
So in a nutshell - I don't know why there is even such debate about the topic. There can be prayer in school as long as it is takes place within a club or some other non-government funded program or activity.
Turn the table - imagine how devoutly Christian parents might feel about having to send their children to a public school endorsing Hinduism - should that be the religion of the majority. I wonder how excited all of the advocates for prayer in school might be then.
I think people are confusing the need for prayer in school with the need for character education. The latter does not necessarily have to be based in religious doctrine to be effective.
Well put, by the way, about having to sacrifice the wants of the majority to protect the rights> of the minority.
Wil
thanks for the support, and your eloquent addition to my post. I can't remember who said, " As long as there are math tests, there will always be prayer in school ".
Yeah, it's a sensitive subject with a lot of people. At some point I also believe too that those in the minority need to exercise a little tolerance themselves. Is it right to deny 99% of the student body the practice of, oh say prayer before a football game, just to avoid offending the one athiest in the group?
I think it's silly to think we can sheild oursleves from all offenses as we go through daily life.
If I were to move to Israel for example, I would have to expect that my children would be recieving a major Jewish influence at school. Does that give me the right to cause trouble? Or do I accept that I am the minority in this case?
My favorite Commander in Chief said:
"Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
~Abraham Lincoln
...well said Mr. President!
Post a Comment