No Strict Construction!

Our constitution is often referred to as 'a living document'. However, this interpretation is not convenient for the strict constructionist' majority of our Supreme Court that are currently trying to kill the
constitution by preserving its originality.

The assumption that our founding fathers, conceiver's of our living document, did not have the foresight to understand that change was inevitable and so created a document to maintain static absolutism is completely without precedence.

Justice Scalia has been quoted citing that "The constitution is not an organism, it is a legal document." he uses this opinion to justify his belief that the constitution must be interpreted through the framers precise words in order to preserve it's guiding principles.

This is the conservative concept of strict constructionism. Instead of allowing our basis of freedom to grow, and change, with the force of time. We must constrict its meaning to fit our present into our past. This is not like putting a round peg into a square hole. No, this is more like putting a an octagon peg into a triangular hole.

This idea of strict constructionism is born out of fear and uncertainty of our future and a perceived inability for our system of government to be able to respond. Therefore, we must hold all things equal in respect to the framers intent. It is also abhorrently wrong and destructive for our nation's unity.

It is a fact that our constitution has passed the test of time, and many countries use our constitution as a model when establishing their own legal base. Do these countries take verbatim the language of our founders and incorporate that into their document? No. They utilize the language as a working model and evolve it into working ideas for their world today.

I think the problem with this concept of a living document upon our strict constructionist' relates to the evolvement, or the evolution of the document. Nothing is supposed to evolve. We are the same as we were 200 years ago, the bible was written 2000 years ago, and in fact we were created 6000 years ago and remain the same now as we were then.

These people are so afraid to evolve because evolution means moving farther away from the roots of their God that they live, work, and play to keep the world in the parameter that they understand, or think they understand.

In conclusion, our founding fathers knew that they could not fathom every possible circumstance that our young nation would endure, and so planned for our Constitution to be flexible. By definition, flexible is not strict. In fact, it is the exact opposite. In saving our constitution, then, we must turn away from the oppositional force that is stagnating our freedom, and turn back to the wisdom of our founders that recognized the changing aspect of freedom.