|
joether -> RE: Looking at the government from a different point of view (1/9/2014 3:25:51 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961
We know what the preamble to the constitution states, but considering just how much the Federal and state governments have grown, have we gone overboard?
quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
If we take each of the bullet points, what does each mean?
1) establish Justice
2) insure domestic Tranquility
3) provide for the common defense
4) promote the general Welfare
Thoughts or opinions?
I think you could have separated this one into four different threads, each tackling one of those concepts. Since each one is pretty important to understand in a full context. Books are written about each concept. So the depth of 'answer' you will receive on this thread from others will be extremely limited. Would be like two medical doctors explaining how to treat a serious bullet wound from the late 18th century and 2014. Most of the answers here will be of the 18th century quality which is not to good. So attempting to answer your question is not going to be a short answer......unfortunately...
1 ) The founding fathers understood that justice can be a good thing and a horrible thing if it is not handled right. The creation of laws and rules by which justice would be fair would keep it from becoming corrupted. The idea of allowing legal representation of the accused, and to see the evidence were two concepts not used in old Europe. So that even the accused can have a fair trial, NOT, by a judge who could be corrupted, but by a jury of their peers. Further that the amendments were set up to give actual definition to key concepts not found in the US Constitution that apply towards the 'individual' level. Which is to say the purpose of the US Constitution itself is to govern all the persons under its domain of control. An that those doing the governing (policing and prosecution as well) had to treat all persons under that control fairly. They knew that as time progressed, new laws would be develop to keep freedoms intact while handling the complicated understanding of 'governing with fairness and dignity'. Anyone that believes its easy to handling that level of governing is a fool!
But justice does not survive if those in the nation do not trust one another. Back in late 18th century, most of those that fought against the King of England, trusted each other. So if justice had to be dealt out, the accused was reasonably understanding they would see a fair trial. In today's terms, there are many people, organizations, and groups that simply distrust other Americans to the point of being enemies. That is a very disturbing notion to anyone that still holds this nation dearly. I'm not saying one should trust the government completely or near completely. But a reasonable trust to and from (with you and the government in consideration here) helps make justice possible for all.
2 ) If the first part is about the concept of justice itself, then logically the logistics of justice must also be stated, right? Allowing for people to go about their business freely while hampering those that have broken the nation's trust (i.e. commited crime by not prosecuted). "The Law" was like the Holy Bible back in the late 18th century. There were no 'well regulated [domestic] militias' in that time in most areas of the original thirteen colonies. It would not be until the 19th century that big cities establish police forces. Understand what a 'law' is, is very important to how the logistics of justice are carried out. A law is not stating you cant do something because its relatively impossible (i.e. floating in the middle of the air by no known means and thus violating the Laws of Gravity in Science). A law is a behavioral adjustment onto society. It can be encouraging (i.e. a law that states one should yield to pedestrians in a cross walk) or negative (i.e. Murder One). That failing to follow the instruction of the law will very well incur the penalty of the law as stated. So the most obvious question is, what is a fair penalty if a person fails the law? More so laws can not be excessive in penalty according to the 8th amendment. Which is why capital punishment on murder cases is an often tough debate to find a solution to.
Then you have those who carry out the actions of upholding the law: law enforcement. These are people given considerable powers to operate over the population. An with power comes the responsibility to wield that power in a good, just, and wise manner. So over time, laws were develop with specific targeting of law enforcement to keep them from abusing those powers and thus, reduce the public's trust in government. With careful consideration of the Constitution, the establishment of the Rule of Law, and keeping law enforcement under strict structure, is doing all the right things a government can do to maintain the public's trust. HOWEVER, there are those that exist in our country that will do their utmost to undermine that trust between government and the people. These individuals have not broken any laws and maybe close to unethical behavior, but for the most part push their desire to undermine the whole thing. As a society I do not think we quite know how to handle these individuals in a fair and good manner without violating said Constitution back onto ourselves down the road. Its not hard to give examples of such groups on a national level, so I will not give one here.
3 & 4 ) The idea of defense back in the 18th century is much, much different than it is today. They never handle to deal with frakking, trainwrecks with horrible chemicals contained, or the threat of nuclear annihilation. The depth of ideas and concepts is well beyond the simple minds of those in the 18th century. So 'providing for the common defense' in the 18th century would be much different than in 2014. Why were hospitals created back then? To help those handle the problems of the human condition. Often obtaining funds and other resources from the government to help common Americans alleviate the suffering. Time progresses, and we found the scale of economics becoming tough for individuals and organizations to help those who can not help themselves. Where as the US Government can do such a task. The common defense is not limited to just healthcare either. The building The building of roads, rail and waterways were also within the government's realm to design, maintain, and organized. To help move people, goods, and in times of need, emergency resources. As time progressed, cities grew, the need to develop good sanitation and bring in water became critical components of government. As knowledge expanded on all fronts, so to has the government's need to balance freedoms to hazards around it. While people disagree over say the EPA, its existence has helped keep this country from experiencing many of the environmental problems plaguing China and Russia right now.
|
|
|
|
