Did the Founding Fathers get anything Wrong?

[Zaha Torte]

It seems there is a faction of people who hold the Founding Fathers up to be almost gods (but certainly some kind of divine representative). So much so that they figure a 240ish yr old legal document is as applicable in today's culture as in one from that long ago.


I'm curious, is there anything you think that Founding Fathers really should have thought a bit harder on. So I'm thinking problems that they REALLY should have been able to foresee and not empowered.

For example (and I am NOT a historian so please feel free to eviscerate and enlighten me)....I don't understand how a judge appointed by a president would be permitted to try that same president in their court room. How is it that this did not have some kind of stop gap measure?

Thoughts? Other examples? Keeping in mind it I'm looking MOSTLY for examples that are not explicitly from our times but are problems that could have arisen back then (ie..nothing about AI...that kinda thing)

The fact that the Constitution allows for Amendments means they covered their bases in my opinion.

 

[NxNW]

Our consent isn't a factor.

Reality is, though.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Reality is, though.

Why is that not reality?

 

[rambot]

The fact that the Constitution allows for Amendments means they covered their bases in my opinion.

Extremely fair point.

Do you think the bar to make amendments is fairly set? I think someone else was saying it was too high?

 

[Zaha Torte]

Extremely fair point.

Do you think the bar to make amendments is fairly set? I think someone else was saying it was too high?

I wouldn't know enough about that process to weigh in - but I like the ones they have come up with so far.

 

[Bradskii]

Our consent isn't a factor.

Yours isn't.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Yours isn't.

Correct - I would be included in our.

 

[Pommer]

It seems there is a faction of people who hold the Founding Fathers up to be almost gods (but certainly some kind of divine representative). So much so that they figure a 240ish yr old legal document is as applicable in today's culture as in one from that long ago.


I'm curious, is there anything you think that Founding Fathers really should have thought a bit harder on. So I'm thinking problems that they REALLY should have been able to foresee and not empowered.

For example (and I am NOT a historian so please feel free to eviscerate and enlighten me)....I don't understand how a judge appointed by a president would be permitted to try that same president in their court room. How is it that this did not have some kind of stop gap measure?

Thoughts? Other examples? Keeping in mind it I'm looking MOSTLY for examples that are not explicitly from our times but are problems that could have arisen back then (ie..nothing about AI...that kinda thing)

Our government and its successful operations relies on people who are scrupulously honest and forthright.

That is Nation has almost never had successful operations shows how screwed up the system is.

Demagogues are our kryptonite.

 

[Pommer]

They should have emphasized that we are under the authority of Jesus Christ.

Maybe this will happen soon, won’t that be a glorious day?

 

[Bradskii]

Correct - I would be included in our.

I'd like to be excused, please.

 

[Pommer]

The fact that the Constitution allows for Amendments means they covered their bases in my opinion.

We’re even “allowed” to scrap the entire thing and begin anew, (should it come to that).

 

[driewerf]

Except we're not.

Our consent isn't a factor.

That wasn't a factor of consent, but the statement of a fact.

 

[Hammster]

Except we're not.

Yes, we are.

And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
— Matthew 28:18

 

[Hammster]

Are we tho?

Yes.

 

[Hammster]

My only problem with that is that a LOT of governments claiming to be under the authority of Jesus Christ throughout history (read: Europe) did a LOT of pretty terrible things.

And a lot of marriages end in divorce.

 

[Bradskii]

Yes, we are.

And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
— Matthew 28:18

I can understand you believing that God said 'I have authority over you'. And that you accept that authority. But neither of us accepts the authority of...for example, Shiva.

You know why we both reject that. So it can't be too hard for you to understand that people will always reject the authority of something they don't think exists.

 

[Hammster]

I can understand you believing that God said 'I have authority over you'. And that you accept that authority. But neither of us accepts the authority of...for example, Shiva.

You know why we both reject that. So it can't be too hard for you to understand that people will always reject the authority of something they don't think exists.

The fact that you reject it is irrelevant. It’s like people who say “not my president “.

 

[Nithavela]

Freedom of speech could have been limited to actual speech or the written word. But I'm not sure I'd even be in favor of that.

I think their biggest mistake was to not realize just how depraved our culture could have gotten.

One biggie that they couldn't have known about: The human brain is not fully developed until age 25. I think putting 25 as the voting age into the constitution itself may have kept things more sane for longer.

Alexander Hamilton was 21 when he signed the declaration of independence.

 

[Bradskii]

It’s like people who say “not my president “.

It's exactly like people saying 'Shiva has no authority over me'.

Incidentally, whoever 'he' is...he ain't. So the same applies.

 

[Hammster]

It's exactly like people saying 'Shiva has no authority over me'.

Incidentally, whoever 'he' is...he ain't. So the same applies.

The only problem for you is that Jesus is God, and He’s King. False gods are just that.