Quote:
| The Constitution is by the people for the people, or it was, and the Constitution trumps government, or at least it should |
Nope; it was written by the elites and was meant to serve the local elites. Further, there's a very big difference between a document written by the people and the people themselves. The government, too, is supposedly of, by, and for the people.
Quote:
| So what makes you assume that I debate in ethos? Sorry, I prefer logos. And as yet, you have yet to make a case. |
A case for what? That age doesn't imply good is a well-known pricniple of logical debate, and ad antiquitem (sp?) is a known logical fallacy, even if it's not as widely used as, say, ad hominem. If you're talking about my attack on the constitution, then I've given a few points; if you want I can give you my entire list of arguments.
Quote:
| France has had a twisted history. They overthrew the King, beheaded him and many nobles and their families, wrote a government document, and then put up a non-Frenchman as their military emporer. The first copy didn't work, to say the least. |
Actually, I'm talking about replacing the constitution of the third republic with this of the fourth.
Quote:
| Sorry, I mangled the wording by interchanging Constitution as a "living document". Documents like the Magna Carta are much older but isn't law in British society. I can say that it is the oldest written national constitution in use. |
In practice, writs such as the magna carta and habeas corpus are as integral to British law as the US Constitution is to American law.
Quote:
| The constitutions entire purpose is to set the limits of the government. That is all. |
So? I wager that you won't accept the Iraqi constitution under Saddam as a constitution...