Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

If An American Believes In The Constitution But Doesn't Believe Th


Winchester

  

17 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

The question is valid, and it deserves an answer. Public opinion is a traditional American value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nihil Obstat

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308342717' post='2255255']
The question is valid, and it deserves an answer. Public opinion is a traditional American value.
[/quote]
Your interpretation of the Constitution excludes you from being a real American. I think you must be French, or, God forbid, Canadian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1308342755' post='2255257']
Your interpretation of the Constitution excludes you from being a real American. I think you must be French, or, God forbid, Canadian.
[/quote]
I believe the Constitution encourages people to believe however they will.

Acting on it is another matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308342968' post='2255263']
I believe the Constitution encourages people to believe however they will.

Acting on it is another matter.
[/quote]

I love that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nihil Obstat

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308342968' post='2255263']
I believe the Constitution encourages people to believe however they will.

Acting on it is another matter.
[/quote]
From what I know of the American Constitution, it seems to me that some aspects are relatively clear, and some have been open to interpretation throughout the years. There has been a general consensus on most of those issues over time (obviously a different debate on whether or not they were the right interpretations). I think though, that an American could call himself a constitutionalist and differ on interpretations of minor areas than another American who calls himself a constitutionalist. That's not to say that both interpretations are right... just that he's still a constitutionalist with a slightly flawed understanding of that specific issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' timestamp='1308343284' post='2255274']
Looking for the third option that just says "Sammich"

I would vote for it.
[/quote]

I love sammiches...as long as they are made by my sisters and sometimes my brothers....especially two hours before Mass, because then I know that I am good for the fast.

I love that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1308343192' post='2255271']
From what I know of the American Constitution, it seems to me that some aspects are relatively clear, and some have been open to interpretation throughout the years. There has been a general consensus on most of those issues over time (obviously a different debate on whether or not they were the right interpretations). I think though, that an American could call himself a constitutionalist and differ on interpretations of minor areas than another American who calls himself a constitutionalist. That's not to say that both interpretations are right... just that he's still a constitutionalist with a slightly flawed understanding of that specific issue.
[/quote]
I believe the Constitution grants women the legal right to vote, even without an amendment to clarify the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308343435' post='2255279']
I believe the Constitution grants women the legal right to vote, even without an amendment to clarify the matter.
[/quote]

I love that women can vote.....

and make sammiches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nihil Obstat

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1308343435' post='2255279']
I believe the Constitution grants women the legal right to vote, even without an amendment to clarify the matter.
[/quote]
Absolutely.
However, let's say that in 1920, lots of constitutional scholars were debating on the 19th amendment (I don't really know how that went down, but that sounds mostly reasonable to me. :) ). I imagine some of them were against it entirely, some though it was already implicit in the constitution, and some felt that an amendment was needed. I think we can call all of them constitutionalists (if their other views generally lined up with what we accept as constitutionalism), because they'd be debating based on the constitution itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...