• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Constitutional extremism?

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I would argue a stone cold dedication and a meticulous interpretation of the Constitution is what everyone should want. When we accept a government that expands the meaning of the Constitution sans an amendment then we have to accept a government that constricts the meaning of the Constitution sans an amendment.

The same people that argue George Bush had no authority under the Commander-in-Chief clause to authorize wiretapping are the ones that criticize those who stay loyal to the intent of the Constitution. If we're going to accept a government who ignores the restrictions under Article I Sec. 8 then we HAVE to accept a government that ignores any 4th amendment protections.

Both sides are guilty of doing this and it's ridiculous. I agree with Bananas on this, I've always been referred to as a conservative but not because I'm a card-carrying Republican or have joined the Tea Party or have attended the Republican National Convention. But because I stay faithful to the intent of the Constitution and believe in it's design (which was Bananas' point about being fundamentally conservative). It's not perfect, but that is what the amendment process is for. I do not accept any expansion or any restriction of any part of the Constitution by the federal government, or anyone for that matter. If a society wishes to expand or restrict it's meaning, then the proper way to go about that is to have your representative propose an amendment. And yes that is cumbersome, it's that way by design.
 

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
What I'm talking about is a fundamental right of American citizens to be free from unreasonable search, without reasonable suspicion. I have been through an unconstitutional checkpoint and I found that to be completely unacceptable. As the court later found also (not for me, but others detained and searched). Cops are not allowed to set up roadblocks to go on a fishing expedition and refusal to give permission for them to go through all your stuff is not reasonable suspicion. I have a lot of stuff in my truck, none of which is illegal, and I won't give my permission for them to dump everything to find nothing then I have to put everything back in it's place. I doubt that Cons would be happy to let cops go through all his stuff either.
I think that position is neither extreme nor right-wing, just American.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I agree with you, SS, 100%. I do think these are fundamental rights that every single American should stand for. I do agree though with Bananas that is it by definition conservative to want to defend and continue these rights that we have had for over 200 years. Not necessarily right-wing or Republican but conservative by definition.
 
Top