It's failed because the American people are actively complacent in it's enforcement.

This. All of the protections and freedoms granted by the Constitution are still relevant today. The only reason the Constitution has failed is because of poor enforcement and people twisting its meaning for political agendas.

If you want your country to rewrite it's framework every 50 years, fine, that's your choice. We'll stick by our core principles that have worked since founding.

DIdn't read the 2nd page, it certainly wasn't Trump's finest moment, although the controversy receiving more attention here is him backtracking on his stance.

He's always been very vague on abortion, he's been flipping around pro-life and pro-choice for many years and then he was caught off guard on the question.

Not very researched on the issue, but from memory there is a period of time a fetus is sufficiently devIoped and capable of feeling emotions such as pain, that I think that is the limit when abortions should be illegal. Anytime before that I don't think the government should have a controlling hand, cases of incest, rape, contraceptive failures are reasons why abortion pathways should be allowed at the very least, and of course abortions should always be legal if the mother's life is under threat.

Doctors are obviously the one that should be punished if any law on abortion is broken, they operate with their medical experience and judgement and also in full legal awareness. Consumers shouldn't be held accountable because of the failure of firm to practice in a legal manner.

Edited 4/1/2016 15:24:57

This. All of the protections and freedoms granted by the Constitution are still relevant today. The only reason the Constitution has failed is because of poor enforcement and people twisting its meaning for political agendas.

If you want your country to rewrite it's framework every 50 years, fine, that's your choice. We'll stick by our core principles that have worked since founding.

+1.

If you don't have the Rule of Law, you may as well be a third world nation with bureaucratic corruption at every level. A Constitution is literally the simplest document in the world to follow, yet politicians on both sides have been ignoring most of its provisions for the last 100 years.

Xpapy, stop spreading blatant lies. Big government is not a pillar of conservative belief; they believe in a limited government. To say that taking away guns would be conservative is ludicrous. You are so wrong.

To call me wrong when you implied conservatism began in America...

Conservism is not as limited as it is in America, in Pakistan, for example, very strict gun laws and an undeniably conservative government. But in America, the Republican conserves are for keeping guns free, taking away guns altogether is extremely conservative. And yes, bigger government is a pillar of conservative belief. Libertarianism and liberalism is for less/limited government.

Republican party stances:

*Grow military spending.
*Curb and crack down on immigration. Actively deport all illegal immigrants.
*For government surveillance of the internet.
*For passing more curbing drug laws and upping the War on Drugs.
*For the government seizing private land for the "greater good" (sounds awfully socialist, if you ask me)
*Against letting incurably ill patients kill themselves.
*Against abortions.
*Against inspecting the national bank.

Out of those, Libertarians only agree with curbing immigration, and even then, less so than the Republicans.

Some Americans obsess over the constitution so much. They need to realise that it has some major flaws that are outdated, that need to be ironed out by now.

+, I've said this before

We'll stick by our core principles that have worked since founding.

Logically, why would "your" core principles that "you're" precisely not sticking by work since founding? Did the constition's writers account for the handheld automatic-fire weapon? I don't know what else is in the American constitution, so can't comment further, but it's bound to be outdated.

If you don't have the Rule of Law, you may as well be a third world nation with bureaucratic corruption at every level.

Well, if there are 0 laws, that's anarchy, as little government as it can get, and nowhere really has 0 laws. But as for generally lax countries, there's Jamaica and Iceland, both fine countries to live in (in my opinion, Iceland has the best living settings in the world).

It is quite obvious from a 1700s perspective that weapons would get better and more lethal, don't see how a improvement in the efficiency aspect of firearms justifies only the government having them, especially when the second amendment says it's for the people to fight the government.

It is quite obvious from a 1700s perspective that weapons would get better and more lethal

It's quite unobvious to forecast what will happen in the future, even more so since they do not have the statistic and forecasting means we do today. Especially thinking that 1475to1775, guns in west European knowledge slightly changed, it was groundable to think that the barrier was hit, as it was with turning lead into gold and with crystal rocks healing folk. And for example, in Esperanto/Ido, in the 1910s, it was growing fast, schools in China even began to implement it as deal of the national curriculum, but then the Xinhai revolution, the First World War and anti-Esperanto movements after that practically made it extinct until the internet times. But noone thought a major war would start in Europe since the Maxim machine gun was developed and a very frightening weapon.

Furthermore, it would be based on what was acceptable in the 1700s, what they wanted in the 1700s, which is obviously different from what is wanted in 2016 (f.e. owning folk).

Edited 4/1/2016 23:05:54

trump is one of the smartest men alive. he's actually calling on scaling back on bases we're using to protect countries such as Japan, and calling on them to protect themselves. America needs to care about itself again.

But noone thought a major war would start in Europe since the Maxim machine gun was developed and a very frightening weapon.

Oh there were folk making predictions. They didn't predict all of the happenings but they thought a war was coming.

Also, it is common for folk with little idea of the thing they're talking about to make predictions on future events. It would be pretty easy for inventors and metal smiths to think that guns would get better.

Oh there were folk making predictions. They didn't predict all of the happenings but they thought a war was coming.

No, folk taught in polit knew about the alliance system, but they thought the same, that a major war could not happen.

Also, it is common for folk with little idea of the thing they're talking about to make predictions on future events.

Rough forecasts they can make, but these are usually very innacurate, especially back then.

"No one will pay good money to get from Berlin to Potsdam in one hour when he can ride his horse there in one day for free."

Wilhelm I of Preußen, 1864

"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will."

Albert Einstein, 1932

"The energy produced by the breaking down of the atom is a very poor kind of thing. Anyone who expects a source of power from the transformation of these atoms is talking moonshine."

Ernest Rutherford, 1933

Edited 4/2/2016 00:20:44

"One day the great European War will come out of some damned foolish thing in the Balkans.” -Otto Von Bismarck

Folk can make predictions, some good and some bad, but they make predictions.

There're lucky guesses, you can't say anything confident about the future, much less back then, while continually righting the constitution will not have this problem at all.

Continuously rewriting the constitution would allow blokes like Obama and Romney to do what they want, essentially making the constitution void. Oh, so you're telling me I can't go around fining people lots of money for no reason? Goodbye eighth and seventh amendments. Oh, I don't like these blokes , time to get rid of the first amendment, it was outdated anyways, the original blokes didn't know about the internet making it so easy to spread ideas.

yeah ^6

Continuously rewriting the constitution would allow blokes like Obama and Romney to do what they want, essentially making the constitution void.

That's already happening, constitution rewritten or not.

Oh yeah you're right. But it would make things a lot easier for them.

Continuously rewriting the constitution would allow blokes like Obama and Romney to do what they want, essentially making the constitution void.

The constitution is bad enough as it is. Abolishing it would be the best thing America has ever done.

reading the title, it looks like that would make trump prolife and prochoice.

The constitution is bad enough as it is. Abolishing it would be the best thing America has ever done.

Unifying England and Scotland as a constituent country would be the best thing Britain's ever done.

Scotland and Wales are far closer in culture. We'd rather be with the sheep-shaggers than the racists.

The constitution is bad enough as it is. Abolishing it would be the best thing America has ever done.

Yes. Let's abolish Free Speech, freedom of religion, right to bear arms, right to due process, and all the rest.

Might as well make it even easier for the government to abuse people am I right?