quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

I am unclear about this, the American Constitution is everyone in America supposed to know it ?

Not word for word. It is taught in the 8th grade, and students take a nationwide test to demonstrate their understanding of the U.S. Constitution. i don't think there's any penalty, besides a bad grade, if they fail. Each state has a constitution too, but i don't think they test on that.

Is it taught in schools, is there a constitutional requirement to know it ?

No, it isn't written into the Constitution that the Constitution must be taught. It is required by law, though. It's a mandatory part of the 8th grade U.S. history curriculum, nationwide.

Is it to be taken in it's original wordage or is it open to reinterpretation ?

The court system bears the responsibility of interpreting the wording of all laws, including the Constitution.

Has the constitution been adhered to and is it being adhered to still ?

That is for the courts to decide. Anyone who thinks that a local, state, or federal law exists in violation of the Constitution, must file a law suit and present their argument to the courts. The courts then decide whether the law is really unconstitutional. But, yes, the courts have overturned laws for being unconstitutional, and will continue to do so.

For example, in Brown vs The Board of Education of Tupeka (1954), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the existing local law mandating racial segregation in schools, violated the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that "no state shall...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The interpretation the Supreme Court used to justify that decision was that the segregated schools were in fact *not* "equal" (the black schools were inferior), and so a citizen's right to an education was *not* being protected equally in each case. In other words, children need to attend the *same* school, regardless of race, in order to protect their right to have the *same* quality of education.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

So the constitution although a wonderful and well thought out piece of writing that could guard a nation's future is in fact bearing less and less relevance in the real world due to the interpretation and reinterpretation that goes on in the courts of law.

No, the courts ability to interpret the Constitution is why it remains meaningful today, over 200 years after it was written. The Constitution was purposely written in broad terms instead of specific, to allow for exactly that kind of reinterpretation over time.

Why do such well though out words need to be reinterpreted in this modern world, was the plain speech of the original constitution not good enough ? ( and I note in the original constitution lawful terminology is actually defined in the constitiution) ?

Because, as i said, the words were written broadly for that very purpose. The intention, to begin with, was to allow the states a certain amount of freedom for making their own laws. They may NOT make a law that violates the U.S. Constitution. But the language of the Constitution is open to a certain amount of interpretation. Lawmakers interpret the constitution one way when they write their laws. The courts have the final say, if the constitutionality of a law is called into question. That is to say, they have the power to overturn laws that they find to be unconstitutional.

The whole idea was to divide power equally between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government, so that no branch had all the power, and each branch could act as a check against abuses of power by the other two.

Would America be in better shape if the original words of the Constitution were adhered to without reinterpretation ?

The original words are so broad that they cannot be adhered to without interpretation. They were written so as to *require* interpretation.

I ask as my understanding of the need to interpret and reinterpret, is a failure to understand what is, or a need to justify other agenda.

i hope i have explained it well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

So the constitution although a wonderful and well thought out piece of writing that could guard a nation's future is in fact bearing less and less relevance in the real world due to the interpretation and reinterpretation that goes on in the courts of law.

Why do such well though out words need to be reinterpreted in this modern world, was the plain speech of the original constitution not good enough ? ( and I note in the original constitution lawful terminology is actually defined in the constitiution) ?

Would America be in better shape if the original words of the Constitution were adhered to without reinterpretation ?

I ask as my understanding of the need to interpret and reinterpret, is a failure to understand what is, or a need to justify other agenda.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

So the constitution although a wonderful and well thought out piece of writing that could guard a nation's future is in fact bearing less and less relevance in the real world due to the interpretation and reinterpretation that goes on in the courts of law.

Why do such well though out words need to be reinterpreted in this modern world, was the plain speech of the original constitution not good enough ? ( and I note in the original constitution lawful terminology is actually defined in the constitiution) ?

Would America be in better shape if the original words of the Constitution were adhered to without reinterpretation ?

I ask as my understanding of the need to interpret and reinterpret, is a failure to understand what is, or a need to justify other agenda.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin
I am unclear about this, the American Constitution is everyone in America supposed to know it ?

Is it taught in schools, is there a constitutional requirement to know it ?

The Constitution itself is silent on this nor, to my knowledge, are there any federal laws requiring it.  However, public education curriculum requirements in most (or all) states include American History and the Constitution.

Is it to be taken in it's original wordage or is it open to reinterpretation ?

As others have stated, it was designed to be interpreted.  The US system of government evolved mechanisms and conventions for doing so

Has the constitution been adhered to and is it being adhered to still ?

Determining what it means to adhere to the Constitution and as well as whether specific laws conform to it is a continual process within the US system.

quote:


CONSTITUTOR. In Civil Law. He who promised by a simple pact to pay the debt of another; and this is always a principal obligation. Inst 4. 6. 9.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

NO. 

framers wrote our constitution.
ron, framers and constitutors are synonymous LMAO
constituencies constitute.
you just agreed with me below, except for that one which isnt applicable to either side of the argument
constitutors constitute.
constitutioners write constitutions.

jellyfish make no jelly. 

Go fish.