I can't go back in time and sit down and have a chat with James Madison, one of the primary authors of the Federalist Papers. That would be a great conversation, and he might be able to clear up some questions I have. Without his insight, or that of the other framers, all theories will always remain conjecture, educated though they may be. So take everything I postulate with a grain of salt.
There's a lot of meat in the Constitution. It was a REVOLUTIONARY document; I can't stress that enough. I feel that there was a nexus of brilliance and statesmanship in the birth of this nation that had never been seen before and hasn't been matched since. Keep in mind that I'm not one of those jingoists who proclaim a single Americentric world view...that everything begins and ends in these United States, but I am in awe of what was done in the years following the Revolutionary War while the nascent republic tried to find its way to statehood.
Let's just put aside all the fabulous content IN our Constitution and focus on the first snippet of the first line: "We the People, in order to form a more perfect union..."
In eleven words, two hugely important concepts are introduced that I don't think get enough air time:
1) People are the center of concern. We are the governors as well as the governed. We finance the government through taxes, so we should be in control of what we pay for and how we do it. Capitalism is an economic model, not a form of government. The way politicians are bankrolled and governing for the benefit of business in opposition to the benefit of People is in direct opposition to the intent of the document.
2) The intent was not to create a perfect government, it was to create a more perfect government. There was an implicit understanding that government would evolve and change to constantly improve. This expected evolution is communicated in the very first line. The belief that the Constitution is untouchable and unimprovable is at the heart of some of our fiercest debates. Does the 2nd Amendment preclude gun control? Absolutely not, just as slaves no longer constitute 3/5ths of a person.
So while I have a great deal of respect for the Constitution, I am not a purist. The document can and should change to always pursue a more perfect union. And my intention is to always support realistic policies that benefit People, all of them, regardless of race, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, whatever. Every human has inherent dignity.
