Published on 03-04-2014 10:56 AM
Can the Constitution Really be Changed from its Intent?
I've had a conflict within myself, and trying to resolve it has been burdensome to some degree, about amendments to the constitution.
Let's say that an Article V convention tried to strike the 2nd Amendment and restrict the 1st Amendment and 4th Amendments, for arguments sake. I don't believe that to be valid.
(I know, they can do whatever they want because they have more and better guns, but let's keep this to natural law and constitutional reasoning).
I would see the amendment process as enhancing the original intent (more freedom, fine tuned limits on government), rather than completely changing it.
Even the supremacy clause (which doesn't directly restrict the amendment process) states "In pursuance of THIS Constitution". THIS Constitution would be the one ratified, with the first ten amendments presumed (otherwise it would not have been ratified).
The Declaration of Independence could be used also, as a guide as well as the Federalist Papers, and perhaps more so. The DOI stated "All men are create equal", therefore I see the change of the 3/5 clause as pursuant to the original intent.
What say y'all?