Constitution Changes

So, even though the Constitution any not be perfect, it is still about as perfect as it can be, which is why America has survived so long. As Benjamin Franklin said, “ I confess that there several parts of the Constitution that I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them.” There are parts of the Constitution that I don’t agree with either, but I can’t guarantee that I won’t ever agree with them when I age. If you wanted, you could say I’m something close to a

Many elements of the constitution remain unchanged. Due to the nature of the US constitution being codified, it has required a two thirds majority in Congress to change anything and this has meant that it hasn’t been greatly changed since the time it was made. The Bill of rights had remained pretty much the same since its creation. The right to bear arms, for example, is still a part of the conversation and despite many people wishing to amend it, this has not been able to happen. This proves the ridgity that the Founding Fathers wanted to give the Constitution.

In Let’s Give Up on the Constitution by Louis Michaels Seidman, it is expressed that he believes that there should be no constitution due to it being written in the past therefore it should no longer be applied to the present or the future, because it wastes so much time thinking on what people from the past would want us to do than finding the actual solution to the problem we are facing today. Also, he gives examples that our founding fathers even went against the constitution, so why should we not get rid of it ourselves considering they didn’t even follow the constitution they agreed on. One of the examples presented was that Thomas Jefferson wanted the constitution changed every generation, in my understanding of this it sounds like he

The Constitution should change with society. Like all societies, ours changes with time. Like it or not, things will be different in the future. Although we agree with things we are doing now, we may not in the future. Our constitution is ment to be part of a lasting government in the land of the free. If the USA really wishes to be held up to that title, its people must be able to agree, and if needed, change the Constitution.

The U.S Constitution has evolved over time from what the original writers wanted. Most importantly, these changes are positive because equality is what the United States is all about. These changes pertain to the amendments regarding right to bare arms, slavery, and the right for all male citizens to vote.

I believe it is time to add items to the Constitution in which it is to be designed for today 's time. Not to rewrite the Constitution anew. While it 's true that the constitution was written centuries ago. It was written in a very particular way in which can be held its values in many generations to come. The ideas created in the document weren 't only meant for their time and place. The ideas can be brought attention in modern times. While some items can be added for a more updated modern issues such as technology, and ethical standpoints. This can greatly benefit the Constitution more thoroughly. Since that is one of the major differences it holds in today 's time.

For over 200 years Americans have adhered to the constitution with little changes needed. Why change something that has been working for so long, in some cases an amendment might need to be changed or undated but for this reason we have the right to ratify if need be. Unfortunately even today conflict exists for freedom

No it's not the constitution that needs reform, it was created for the ages, it's the faulty progressive thinking and the usurpation of that document that needs to be addressed, it needs to be protected in both physical and spiritual form!

The U.S Constitution is a remarkable work, one of the greatest declarations of liberty and law in human history. It has survived as the law of the land for 227 years, but things have changed quite a bit since then. The interpretation of this document has led to much controversy over the years. Should the Constitution be modified to fit more present day ideals?

I believe that the Constitution should be evaluated according to how it serves the American population today. Americans are raised through public schooling and popular culture to view the Constitution as nearly infallible and those that wrote it as inspired. However, it is clearly not a perfect document. After the bill of rights there has come about seventeen additional amendments, or small changes by definition, to the original document. It intentionally contained no mention of one of the most egregious aspects of American history – slavery. Despite all of these things, I agree with Madison that the Constitution needed to limit democracy in order to provide a strong enough national government that would not endanger personal liberty.

changes to the Constitution and foundational rights. The amount of protests, riots, and gun- related crimes would immediately rise.

We should change our constitution for the reason that the political process that we use today is inefficient and unequal. The framers of the constitution made the political process inefficient on the basis that they wanted the government to be powerful enough to protect them from another state but not so powerful that they could take their property. The constitution was set up to protect the minority being that the framers of the constitution were a part of the minority. A way in which the political process is inefficient is that the legislative branch is split up into two branches the House and the Senate. The framers of the constitution did this to give states power in the political process as a result of them being independent prior to

The Constitution was written in such a general sense that the ideas in there seem to fit no matter what the era, the basis of the Constitution is a way to set up our government, which I believe will not become outdated. That being said, the Constitution will be continued to be amended, because like the article stated, it was by no means a perfect document. In that sense, we are not bound to the complete writings of these men, but what sticks is the reasons and purpose behind their writing, the messages of freedom and liberty that it expresses and attempts to fulfill. Loyalty to the Constitution means repeatedly amending it and improving it as well as guaranteeing that our governmental leaders adhere to its basic ideology. Every generation should have the right to amend at their needs, but if they were allowed to continually rewrite a national constitution I foresee that there would be a loss of certain liberties and checks, for people are selfish and what might seem beneficial for them at a certain time may not be beneficial or even sustainable in the future.

I view the constitution as a solid foundation that should be followed and enforced better. I also believe that with the lack of discipline and respect for the law that our generation has, nothing will change that. Even going as far as changing the constitution, our country is too far gone for a document to change anything. It’s a harsh reality to think about, but its true in my opinion. Our generation and how future generations are being raised with such a sense of entitlement, its evolved into “you do as you please, and expect no consequence”. At one point in time our country lived by the constitution, and took it seriously. I agree times have changed, but if people can’t even take the constitution seriously, what makes anyone think they will

Facts This writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, raising a question of public importance involving the interpretation of Articles 74 (pari materia to Article 163) and 156 of the Constitution, has been referred to this six-judge Constitution Bench. On August 7th, 2014, President Pranab Mukherjee issued a Presidential order removing Mizoram Governor Kamla Beniwal with barely four months left of her tenure. Ms. Beniwal, who had crossed swords with PM Narendra Modi as Gujarat governor, was only recently transferred to Mizoram. According to Ms. Beniwal, she was transferred after a nudge from home secretary Anil Goswami to quit did not elicit the desired response from her. The Government has stated that the decision to