Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight
Strict constructionism equals stagnation.
|
Absolutely not. This is why there is an amendment process. Why add an amendment process if they did not think the rules and mores of society would change?
If something in the Constitution does not stand up to the test of time or social reform, then it can be changed. It is not an easy process, nor should it be. This means that it is not changed easily - if it were easy, than we would have a flag burning amendment (which I oppose, btw).
But to change the meaning of the words as a justice, or to look to foreign law for interpretation, is to eliminate it altogether.
There is no living, breathing document except through the amendment process.