'I offer the flaw of the Constitution as presented by President John Adams: 'Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.'"
In last week's column, I expressed my concern that our country is rapidly moving away from the governmental restraint outlined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. I invited people to briefly tell me why they thought the Constitution was flawed or unfair, or with what parts they disagree.
I received so many replies that I had to pick and choose what to include. I received few e-mails from true liberals, though I received many replies from conservatives who gave me their thoughts as to how liberals interpret these documents. The replies were extremely polite, for which I thank everyone.
I'm not making judgments on these answers; I'm just reporting them as a glimpse into how people interpret the Constitution. Each paragraph is input from a different reader:
"The Constitution is flawed in that it does not contain a mechanism for The People to enforce it, other than the ballot box (which doesn't repeal legislation) – or revolution."
"Is Social Security constitutional? How did the politicians and the Supreme Court justify this Ponzi scheme back in the 1930s?"
"I don't think the liberals think or believe the Constitution is flawed. I think that they love to play with and tweak words to suit what they distortedly believe is their 'right' to have what they have not earned. They hate to see people work hard, have what they have not earned, and tear us down because they feel jealous and inferior. They feel that they are owed and want to force charity upon the working people. Granted, many of these liberals do work, but I do not think that their brainwashed minds of entitlement allow them to fathom the magnitude of these (Pelosi, Reid, Congress, Obama) decisions and the impact it will have on all of our lives. They love being lied to because it gives them a cause. ... Liberals love to have a cause, no matter how twisted and false it may be. They have not learned what is really important in life, therefore push their own selfish and destructive agendas."
When did government officials start ignoring our national charter – and why does it continue? Find out in "Who Killed the Constitution?"
"Liberals will no doubt respond to the challenge by quoting the preamble to the Constitution – they always do. They will say that their liberal policies 'promote the general Welfare' and thus are constitutional. My top two responses: 1) In saying the general-welfare clause is unlimited, you are saying the founders were trying to establish a government without limits on what it can do – Soviet-style? 2) However, the preamble exactly means that 'in order to promote the general welfare we do establish and ordain this specific set of enumerated powers and limits to government action, namely, this Constitution.' You cannot quote the general-welfare clause without also saying the rest of the Constitution (not every pie-in-the-sky scheme you can think of) is the modifier to the general-welfare clause. So it is entirely appropriate that Nancy Pelosi be challenged: If you are trying to promote the general welfare, as you clearly think you are, where in the CONSTITUTION do find that power enumerated? You can't quote the general-welfare clause without pointing out that it is strictly limited to what is in the rest of the Constitution." http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115243