The Post Your Thoughts of the Moment Thread 2

[Jamaha]

Things got surprisingly real once I saw the lecture schedule for our research seminar being updated:

22 Apr 15 Master's thesis presentation: [Jamaha], [title]

Professor also suggested we aim for the June committee meeting for the evaluation. That means I should have the final hardcover version of the thesis done by May 20th. Along with a couple of remaining courses. Exciting (terrifying) times ahead.

[Mashi]

For one of my classes I read an article that proposed we get rid of the US Constitution.
Thoughts?

Won't ever happen in the USA given our acrimonious two-party system and system of judicial review.  But even if we could, there would be no major purpose.  The Constitution was designed such that it could be amended whenever deemed necessary.  It's a fluid document that retains its power through writing and supplies us our freedoms based on that writing.

[K-NiGhT]

Mashi spitting hot fiyah

[mikey]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/opinion/lets-give-up-on-the-constitution.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I personally don't think there's anything wrong with the constitution, but the people who are ignoring it

[K-NiGhT]

Hmm...the forums are pretty quiet today.

[mikey]

I think you can guess why

[Mashi]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/opinion/lets-give-up-on-the-constitution.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I personally don't think there's anything wrong with the constitution, but the people who are ignoring it

It's an interesting opinion piece, but what I stated still stands.

The repercussions of removing the Constitution would basically have us completely revamp our government.  The judicial branch, whose basis relies on judicial review based on the Constitution, would lose meaning and purpose.  The article claims that the President and Congress would still be held under scrutiny for their obligations, but makes no indication of where those obligations arise from and how they're to be based.  The reason we have a Constitution is to circumscribe those obligations and limits.
Seidman places too much confidence in the people to come to a rational basis on major decisions without a criterion (i.e. the Constitution) to be used as a standard, in my opinion.  Likewise, he provides no evidence reflecting that the government will behave as he asserts it will without a Constitution.

It's true that the government (in particular, the President and Congress) has often broken pass limits as defined by the Constitution, but these behaviours have all been rectified by the judicial branch when deemed necessary.  You don't usually see unconstitutional bills passed during times of peace and prosperity, that is to say.

[Maelstrom]

It's been a refreshingly quiet day on NSM today.

[Xaoz]

It's been a refreshingly quiet day on NSM today.

Sorry, I was busy. Next shitstorm tomorrow, I promise!

[KefkaticFanatic]

Unfortunately hyperconservative groups like to run and hide behind the more antiquated portions of the document to justify their bigotry, backwards social policies, or other needlessly negative societal directions.  Removing it entirely would obviously never happen but there is also a lot of it that is.. problematic.

[BlackDragonSlayer]

It's been a refreshingly quiet day on NSM today.

I can echo this sentiment; it's nice to have a "calm" day here.

[K-NiGhT]

gotta admit tho it's kinda boring D:

[SlowPokemon]

No it's not xD NSM has been stressing the hell out of me this week. I don't like arriving to the forums with five pages of unread topics with useless posts

[Nebbles]

Peacefulness is never a bad thing.

I might get a full snow day tomorrow hella

[K-NiGhT]

Jealous. D: