|Date:||11/2/2020 7:44:01 AM|
|Subject:||RE: Amend your constitution...|
It would actually be making sure that private companies are following the constitution would it not?
I think you're confusing the Constitution with standard laws. The Constitution is a document written 'by the people' to control the power of the federal government. It wasn't written to give the government power to control the people. If the government started arresting people for speech, religion, etc., we would have a problem.
Building a country on the foundations of free speech and liberty is a great idea, but I don't believe the founding fathers had Twitter and Instagram in mind when the drafted it. If they had known then what we know know, they probably would realize that the majority of Americans are expressing their version of free speech online and the companies that run the social media platforms have ultimate control over who is allowed and who is not allowed to voice their opinions. They can let only Liberals post data, while deleting the accounts of conservatives and vice versa.
I absolutely abhor the argument of "Our founding fathers didn't have x in mind when they wrote y in the Constitution." Of course they didn't. They had, and admitted to having, no idea what the future would bring. The Constitution was written the way it was so it could be amended in the future if needed. Again though, the Constitution wasn't written to control private citizens or companies.
I get that the constitution is important it plays a large role in the freedoms you have today, but at what point would you consider amending it to adapt to life in the 21st century?
The Constitution has been amended 17 times since the original ratification. I personally don't see a single article that I feel needs to be amended, but, if enough citizens demanded it, it could be done.
How about when AI ensures more unemployment in America? Truck drivers, cab drivers, manufacturing, retail etc. are all going to get hit hard when HAL 9000 grows legs and takes their jobs. Would you support a universal basic income when unemployment hits 40%? Do you really think most Americans will voluntarily donate their money to help those people out when they're already at risk of losing their jobs too?
I would not, under any circumstance, support universal anything. When you start getting into 'universal' language, it indicates more power for government. If the country hit 40% unemployment, where is the money for universal income coming from? If there was universal income, where is the incentive for people to work at all?
My support is and will always be for limited government and a people that govern themselves. People seem to be under this misconception that everyone would instantly die if they didn't have the government to guide and protect them. I don't believe that at all. Get rid of most taxes, get rid of most government agencies, require bills to be voted on individually so politicians can't sneak laws in, add term limits and I think the country would flourish.
It's not hard to see where things are heading... if you change nothing and unwaveringly hold onto the constitution without allowing any kind of interpretation, would it not be causing more harm than good?
The Constitution is interpreted daily. The Supreme court uses the Constitution to determine every case outcome. Higher level courts do as well.