BlueTrain said:
No offense intended but we the people do not all share the same concept of what this nation is supposed to be. Never did.
Really shouldn't matter. The COTUS is what it is and says what it says. We only run into problems when we decide we don't like something and would like it reinterpreted.
For instance, slavery should have been illegal from the get-go. Many of the founders wanted the nation formed without slavery but knew/concluded that forming a national government with an outright ban on slavery would be impossible. They figured it would work itself out. I doubt they expected a civil war, but they were right, it did work itself out.
The words they chose, regardless of slavery, were correct from the Declaration of Independence to the implications of the Preamble "All men (human-kind) are created equal, endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights..." "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,...."
The problem is that we allow people to reinterpret and place meaning where there was none and no intent ever existed. The First Amendment, for example:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Somehow, we came to a place where a direct and unambiguous prohibition against congress establishing a state religion became a prohibition against a white cross placed by private citizens to memorialize a deceased person or against a principal participating in prayer meetings at school, even against kids wearing t-shirts with crosses on them. (and yes, such nonsense has been used to restrict "non-christian" religions as well, and it's equally unconstitutional)
Even if we accept, "Incorporation", we would have the meaning the STATE governments may not establish a state religion. This still has no applicability to a monument of the 10 commandments in a court house or a principal praying at school.
Original meaning and intent. "Congress".... Shall make no "
law"....
What we have today is not a matter of "interpretation", it's a fundamental alteration of intent. It is an attempt to change our nation into something that it is not and was not,
into something that the COTUS was designed to prevent.
Changes (amendments) and laws are intended to clarify and reinforce,
not alter the meaning of constitutional principles. Today, and I suppose there have always existed some, there are far to many with the intent to ALTER our nation, not preserve it.
