Should America's Constitution undergo an update for the 21st century?

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 May 2017 06:44:56 -0400

Our Constitution is the only one still in use from the 18th century. It was a huge step forward during its formation due to the fact that it emphasized putting power with the people. However, most Democratic nations have a constitution that has been updated/revised within 100 years. While we do have amendments, do you believe it's time to really take a look at ours and give it an "upgrade"?
Clarification: I do not mean "upgrade" as in "replace".

MORE Clarifications: People, I am not advocating for a change in our Constitution, nor am I saying our Constitution is bad. I'm asking a question. That's it. Don't think I'm trying to tell you it NEEDS to be changed, I'm just asking for everyone's thoughts and opinions.

Response by CPT Tom Monahan made May 19 at 2017 6:54 AM

CPT Tom Monahan — Fri, 19 May 2017 06:54:20 -0400

Only through Amendments. First are to get rid of income tax and direct election of Senators.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2017 6:56 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 May 2017 06:56:56 -0400

The Framers devised a system if Congress and the States chose to amend an item in the Constitution. I would ask which section in your opinion needs to be amended?

Response by SPC Kevin Ford made May 19 at 2017 8:09 AM

SPC Kevin Ford — Fri, 19 May 2017 08:09:36 -0400

No, I am very leery of such updates as they run through our political process. Most amendments have either been to clarify and add rights (voting rights for instance) or to change something that isn't functioning correctly (like the 12th amendment, lot's of these). Once in a while an amendment gets through that removes our rights (I'm looking at you 18th amendment). It's things like the that last one that make me very cautious about amendments.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2017 8:23 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 May 2017 08:23:13 -0400

If you mean "upgrade" as in a rewrite: the answer is "NO". Constitutional Amendments effectively make our Constitution a living document. I would strengthen it be requiring a 100% vote that was required by our Declaration of Independence.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2017 8:30 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 May 2017 08:30:13 -0400

No the constitution is the frame work for the government if anything need to be updated it is the USC.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2017 9:01 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 May 2017 09:01:07 -0400

When the Constitution was written, it seems that they tried to look ahead and create a document that would address second and third order effects. One of the reasons I believe that it has stood virtually untouched for so long. I am not sure I trust the current occupants of Congress of thinking ahead and watching out for the best interest of the country.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2017 9:09 AM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 May 2017 09:09:28 -0400

Good question. Easy answer - No. It has served us well since our Revolution, and through some tough times. Even a war against each other, so amend if need be but leave the framework alone. It will open the door for tons of dark money to create gaps allowing further snatching of the basic rights we all should have as Americans. Given the opportunity, the big money interests would turn it into a contract; full of loopholes and workarounds, written in language that only they understand and will exploit at every chance. Thanks for sharing.

Response by SGT Bryan O'Reilly made May 19 at 2017 9:23 AM

SGT Bryan O'Reilly — Fri, 19 May 2017 09:23:34 -0400

In, short, Sarge, 'No.' While Ideally, it should evolve with the societies needs, and some of it seems archaic, I think it would be a grave mistake for us to think we can improve on what's kept us whole as a people these 240+ years. I would rather see it become curricula for all Americans and for them to pass a citizenship test upon graduating High School I consider it a travesty that only about 10% have ever even read it.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made May 19 at 2017 10:16 AM

MSG Brad Sand — Fri, 19 May 2017 10:16:20 -0400

NO! Not just NO but Hell NO.
Our current Constitution is only fifteen years old...and 14 days. Part of the beauty of our Constitution is that the updates you speak about are built into the document, with the last being done on May 5, 1992.
Is it time for additional amendments or 'upgrades'? Maybe, but what do you have in mind Another part of the beauty and brilliance of the document is that the process to make those changes it is not something that easily be swayed with the winds of public opinion.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made May 19 at 2017 10:17 AM

MSgt James Mullis — Fri, 19 May 2017 10:17:24 -0400

No!

Response by MSG Stan Hutchison made May 19 at 2017 10:42 AM

MSG Stan Hutchison — Fri, 19 May 2017 10:42:06 -0400

I would simply say be careful what one wishes for. IMO, a Constitutional convention would result in disaster. There would be those that want to change most of the Bill of Rights in one manner or the other. Some would want to modify the 1st Amendment, some would want to modify the 2nd, etc.
Our present system may be archaic, but it has served us well for these 240+ years.
Leave well enough alone.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2017 10:58 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 May 2017 10:58:17 -0400

No. There is nothing wrong with our Constitution. Being old does not make it bad.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2017 11:09 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 May 2017 11:09:57 -0400

I believe the reason our Constitution has not undergone drastic changes like these other democratic nations is because we are a Constitutional Republic. This means that everyone gets a say, whereas in a democracy, the constitution can be amended by the elected officials. In a republic, the constitution outlays rights that the populace have that cannot be revoked - inalienable rights. These rights are in place, even if the elected officials want to remove them. Basically, in a "pure democracy" the majority can impose their will on the people without restraint.

Response by SGT Tony Clifford made May 19 at 2017 12:32 PM

SGT Tony Clifford — Fri, 19 May 2017 12:32:17 -0400

And here is the misunderstanding. Our constitution was devised so that it could be amended. The last amendment was ratified in 1992. In fact there have been 10 amendments in the last 100 years ranging from women's suffrage and voting age to prohibition of alcohol and it's repeal. I would not be in favor of a serious overhaul especially at this time, because we are living in a time where extremes are the way of the day. Another misconception, or as I hope miss speak, is that we aren't a democracy. We are a republic. Democracies are impossible in application for any government larger than a city-state. They also have the added problem of requiring a society to be regularly informed about politics and that is never the case.

Our constitution was devised by geniuses to prevent one group from gaining power and removing or adding anything they want. Think of it as a protection of the minority against the tyranny of the majority.

Response by SSgt John Carter made May 19 at 2017 12:54 PM

SSgt John Carter — Fri, 19 May 2017 12:54:32 -0400

The Constitution is a "living" document and a testament to the vision of the Founding Fathers. Even amending the Constitution is very rare and it should be. Except for tweaks such as universal suffrage, civil rights, and abolishing slavery, it has stood the test of time as it was written.

Response by PO1 John Miller made May 19 at 2017 2:10 PM

PO1 John Miller — Fri, 19 May 2017 14:10:00 -0400

No.

Response by SFC Wade W. made May 19 at 2017 4:25 PM

SFC Wade W. — Fri, 19 May 2017 16:25:00 -0400

Simple enough. No.

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made May 19 at 2017 4:37 PM

SFC Jim Ruether — Fri, 19 May 2017 16:37:30 -0400

I say leave it alone. Our framers were so much more educated than anyone educated today and placed safeguards to prevent attempts to change our Constitution.

Response by PO2 Skip Kirkwood made May 19 at 2017 7:09 PM

PO2 Skip Kirkwood — Fri, 19 May 2017 19:09:14 -0400

The original constitution was purposefully made difficult to amend. it is also very solid. I would not support any process that "opens it up" just because it is old. It is still the best one in the world, even though some judges have stretched and twisted parts.

Response by SGT Joseph Gunderson made May 20 at 2017 10:13 AM

SGT Joseph Gunderson — Sat, 20 May 2017 10:13:43 -0400

Negative.
The thing about our constitution is that it was written with the idea in mind that small things would need to be changed overtime, this the ability to sign into law amendments to the document. However, the central ideas (ie the constitution itself) should never have to be edited or updated or however you wish to phrase it. I know that it sounds very high and mighty of an American to say about the American constitution, but it was a document before it's time. It brought to light ideas of governance that really were unheard of. You mean that it is entirely legal for the citizens to overthrow their government? Damn right; in the U.S. it is (under the right circumstances of course). I believe that the constitution still works just fine is because of the built in systems of checks and balances along with the ever looming threat on our elected officials that if they do go too far we can just have all of their heads on pikes in the morning...

Response by Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen made May 20 at 2017 10:39 AM

Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen — Sat, 20 May 2017 10:39:26 -0400

This falls into the "If it isn't broken don't fix it" category IMO. I disagree with the concept that Amendments aren't an update to the Constitution. The framers of the Constitution had the insight to realize that there would be changes in civilization that would require updating the Constitution and thus created the amendment capability. Given that, your premise that the Constitution from the 18th Century needs to be updated is flawed. In fact the Constitution dates from 1992 when it was last "updated/upgraded ". Has society and civilization changed since then, sure, and is there the need to look at more Amendments, possibly, but that doesn't mean we need to "upgrade" the entire Constitution, it works fine as is.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 20 at 2017 6:17 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 May 2017 18:17:48 -0400

No. It would be more appropriate if our hired help would bother themselves to actually read it. From the local level to the federal level, a significant number of our employees have no clue what the Owner's Manual says, nor have they bothered to read the writings of the Founding Fathers so they may properly interpret it.

As an aside, we are NOT a democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. We are a collection of Free and Independent States.

Response by SMSgt Lawrence McCarter made May 20 at 2017 10:32 PM

SMSgt Lawrence McCarter — Sat, 20 May 2017 22:32:44 -0400

If it isn't broke don't try to fix it ! Seems We need to concentrate on adherence to the laws of the nation instead of finding ways to circumvent these laws as they are written. Never mind trying to read into the laws things they never said. If a rule of law doesn't follow the guidelines set in the Constitution then the laws needs change, NOT the constitution of the United States. I would be very wary of movements to change anything in the Constitution itself which should be the basis for deciding what other rules, regulations or laws are valid.

Response by MSG Jay Jackson made May 21 at 2017 10:22 AM

MSG Jay Jackson — Sun, 21 May 2017 10:22:17 -0400

I say update it now. We need to fix the 14th, 10th amendments. Impose term limits, fix the SCOTUS from life to terms approved by voters. It is still a great document, but it was meant to be amended as the need arose so I say amend it!

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 21 at 2017 11:53 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 21 May 2017 11:53:00 -0400

No our For Fathers wrote it that way for a reason

Response by SGT Robert Agee made May 22 at 2017 10:16 AM

SGT Robert Agee — Mon, 22 May 2017 10:16:57 -0400

The constitution has served us well. The amendment process works. What doesn't work is Judges legislating from the bench.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 22 at 2017 11:54 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 22 May 2017 11:54:02 -0400

It's designed to be a living document. The Amendments allow it to change. It has changed since it's inception - hence the Amendments. No I don't think we need to write an entirely new Constitution.

Response by Lt Col Robert Canfield made May 25 at 2017 12:32 PM

Lt Col Robert Canfield — Thu, 25 May 2017 12:32:30 -0400

It has been updated: a total of 27 times since it was written. The founders made provisions to allow changes to the constitution as needed:
- requiring 2/3 of the Senate and the House to ratify a new amendment
- or...via a constitutional Convention with 3/4 of the states (38) agreeing to ratify changes
To establish a Constitutional convention, 2/3 of the states must agree to convene. It has come close to that number in recent years, but its not quite there yet.
Changes to the constitution can be recommended at any time, but the framers set the bar quite high in order to ratify changes. Case in point: the Equal Rights Amendment during the 1970s. It got approval of 35 of the 38 states needed, so it never became an amendment.

Response by SSG Floyd Morris made Jun 2 at 2017 6:41 PM

SSG Floyd Morris — Fri, 02 Jun 2017 18:41:20 -0400

The Government should NOT be able to change our Constitution, to suit themselves, (as the two houses have done in the past!) If the law says one thing to the people, those assholes are not exempt just because they think their elite! The fact of the matter is that they can break the law of our Constitution, but a citizen makes a copy of a movie, there is up to $500,000 fine.if a socalled REPRESENTATIVES for the people do something that against the citizens like lying to the public, they never have a investigation, or held accountable!

Response by PFC Robert Rice made Oct 1 at 2017 2:38 PM

PFC Robert Rice — Sun, 01 Oct 2017 14:38:31 -0400

No!

Response by Sgt Dale Boston made Dec 23 at 2018 4:24 PM

Sgt Dale Boston — Sun, 23 Dec 2018 16:24:18 -0500

brilliant idea
as we have done as intelligent humans evolve amend and update how cars homes,foods, clothes, medicines are made and used, why not our constitution.

Response by Sgt Dale Boston made Feb 5 at 2019 11:53 PM

Sgt Dale Boston — Tue, 05 Feb 2019 23:53:05 -0500

Tsipursky's first and most important bit of advice is to forget facts. The problem is almost certainly one of emotions, not knowledge.

Response by SGT Thomas Heinold made Feb 7 at 2019 10:15 PM

SGT Thomas Heinold — Thu, 07 Feb 2019 22:15:49 -0500

In my opinion Big Fat No