First Amendment = Christianity Only

[Fidel_Castronaut]

We have an amendment process that allows us to make changes to match the evolving needs of modern society. Eventually subverting that process no matter how convenient will backfire.

And... just how is the amendment process different from an evolved constitution? Both describe the same process; gradual change over time to reflect a changing environment.

Maybe he means entrenched/codified and un-entrenched/ uncodified?

[Doubting Thomas]

The executive branch over the last few administrations with their unaccountable regulatory bodies and overuse of bomb power.

Unfortunately the War Powers Act gave the president the ability to (unofficially) declare war instead of waiting for Congress to do it. Whether or not that's Constitutional I'll leave up for debate, though the Constitution clearly spells out that only Congress can do so.

[Neo-Scholastic]

And then we have "kinetic military actions"...

[Jackalope]

Unfortunately the War Powers Act gave the president the ability to (unofficially) declare war instead of waiting for Congress to do it. Whether or not that's Constitutional I'll leave up for debate, though the Constitution clearly spells out that only Congress can do so.

Well, on the one hand, Congress does have the authority to delegate it's power, else we wouldn't have all of those three-letter agencies the we all know and love (I'm looking at you, IRS). I don't recall there being any specifics about how Congress might go about delegating such power, *however* I think it's reasonable to think that there was never any intent to allow Congress to delegate it's power to the Executive Branch. I believe that falls under the same "open to debate" umbrella.

[Jackalope]

We have an amendment process that allows us to make changes to match the evolving needs of modern society. Eventually subverting that process no matter how convenient will backfire.

And... just how is the amendment process different from an evolved constitution? Both describe the same process; gradual change over time to reflect a changing environment.

How they're different is that one is explicitly lawful, and the other is not. I appreciate that the amendment process is difficult, perhaps more difficult than it ought to be. Fortunately, there's a process for changing the amendment process.

What I personally object to is ignoring the law because we don't like what it says - rather than changing it to suit our liking.

[Jackalope]

The executive branch over the last few administrations with their unaccountable regulatory bodies and overuse of bomb power.

That list is too short.

Which one?

last few administrations

or

unaccountable regulatory bodies and overuse of bomb power

Certainly the latter didn't start with the former. Accelerated, yes - that I have no argument with.

[Minimalist]

The executive branch over the last few administrations with their unaccountable regulatory bodies and overuse of bomb power.

The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war.

Interesting slant you have on reality there. When has Congress failed to authorize the use of force? Its one of the few truly bi-partisan things in Congress. If I recall correctly, it was Congress which couldn't wait for Obama to start bombing Libya and Syria and was outraged when he didn't. Just as they are now outraged that he seems to have avoided a war with Iran.

The scumbags of the military-industrial complex hate it when they don't get to use their shiny new toys to fuck over someone else's country.

[Doubting Thomas]

I think it's reasonable to think that there was never any intent to allow Congress to delegate it's power to the Executive Branch.

That certainly screws up the whole checks and balances thing.

---

The scumbags of the military-industrial complex hate it when they don't get to use their shiny new toys to fuck over someone else's country.

As much as I agree with you, their new toys are anything but shiny. Reflecting sunlight easily alerts the enemy as to your location.

[ronedee]

Tear up the constitution and see what happens. That 200 year old paper is the only thing that is protecting your ass.

No, it is the current population of Americans that honor an evolved constitution that protects us. The Founders are dead as nails and protect no one. The constitution is only as powerful as the ruling class want it to be, and in the case of Guantanamo and rendition, it is ignored as it becomes inconvenient.

And there are speed limits posted on the roadways.

Take those signs down and see what happens!

But, its the usual bon afaire around here... point to the anomalies to push your points. Throw the baby out with the bath water!

"Get rid of that nasty, outdated Constitution."

Why? Because God is mentioned in it?

Do any of you know, or even care about the consequences of your words and actions.

[Crossless2.0]

God is mentioned in the Constitution? Huh?