Is the Constitution a contract?

[Jed Dilligan]

If the government breaks it, do the people have to keep it?

[Adsos Letter]

1. the relationship between government...

...and those governed is a contract...

According to the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence a government which ceases to protect the natural rights of its people may be dissolved by those governed.

[Jed Dilligan]

2. I like your avatar...

;)

[Adsos Letter]

3. The Bear Flag?

[Jed Dilligan]

7. A rebel flag of sorts.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

43. I wish I would have read your post, the first and the most correct.

I feel like I am IN an epiphany.

I feel,...really frightened.

I do not know what to do with that feeling.

[Yupster]

44. If it is a contract,

it would be between the states and the federal government. It was the states who gave up their power to the federal government thropugh the Constitution, and the state legislatures who agreed to sign onto the Constitution.

It is not a contract that one side can leave if it chooses to. That was the Confederates' theory which was disproven in blood.

[Adsos Letter]

47. you are correct...

...and was demonstrated before the Civil War by the need for the Constitution to be ratified by the separate states.

I was thinking in terms of the continuing legitimacy of the government itself if it fails to protect the natural rights of people as agreed to in the Constitution, especially those enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

I do believe that an abrogation of those rights legitimizes revolution to restore those rights.

That is different from separating ties; it is more akin to restoring legitimate government.

I mis-addressed the OP's question, and you have corrected me.

[Yupster]

49. The way the Confederates worded it

was that government derive its power from the consent of the governed.

The southern states withdrew that consent by leaving the Constitution by formal votes the same way they joined.

They also claimed the federal government had broken the original Constitutional agreement by usurping powers not belonging to it, and they claimed they were looking to again live under a truly Constitutional government.

That's why the Great Seal of the Confederacy was George Washington on a Horse. Also, the Confederate Constitution was almost an exact duplicate of the US Consitution. There were a few minor differences. One six year term for President. Line item veto were a couple. They even kept the Electoral College.

[BlooInBloo]

4. Are you serious? Who would the signators be precisely?

[Jed Dilligan]

8. I know I didn't sign it

But it does set up relationships the way a contract does. At what point of one party breaking the contract or "contract" does the whole thing become void?

[BlooInBloo]

9. Then it ain't a contract.

[Jed Dilligan]

11. So it just stays there no matter how much the government breaks it?

Then it means nothing at all.

[BlooInBloo]

14. (shrug) Neither does the money in your wallet, if you want to get metaphysical.

[Mind_your_head]

22. Well, you can just hand all of that fiat money in your wallet over to me

:evilgrin: I'll take REAL good care of it for ya......

What? You wouldn't do THAT b/c you think/believe it has some 'value' after all???? *shock*horror*

[BlooInBloo]

26. Yes. That's why I said "metaphysical", rather than "practical".

[HCE SuiGeneris]

16. Oral contracts are often enforced. n/t

[Jed Dilligan]

17. And who exactly are "We the People"?

Not just the individual ratifiers, I'd say, but every American for all time to come. Presumably that signator has a contractual relationship with those who in the future would adopt positions embodied therein--Presidents, Vice-Presidents, Justices, Representatives, and Senators.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

24. Before I plead ignorance as you delve deeper,

my understanding is the "people" are all who claim citizenship in this United States of America.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

34. Kicking just because of my fascination with this topic. n/t

[immoderate]

42. Cunundrum: Which comes first?

How can you claim citizenship in an entity that has yet to be formed? I think the Declaration was uses general terms. I think it is based on what is called "natural law." "We" is anybody and everybody.

The Constitution layed it all out in practical terms.

--IMM

[BlooInBloo]

30. self-delete.

[Goblinmonger]

31. Social Contract. John Locke.

Worth reading up on. Then there are others that work on the social contract, but start with Locke.

[BlooInBloo]

32. Given that I have a Ph.D. in philosophy from one of the top schools in the world....

... I'll simply move on, since that you've amply demonstrated that you know nothing about the matter by naming Locke over Rousseau in the social contract field.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

33. What school?

[BlooInBloo]

35. Sorry - I believe in my complete right to anonymity. You're welome to not believe me...

... if you prefer.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

36. np.

Just curious.

[Goblinmonger]

37. Oh, come on

Jean-Jacque may have written the book with that title, but certainly you would not argue that the works of Locke had nothing to do with Rousseau's work. Certainly they taught you that. Hence why I said you should start with Locke and then move on to those he influenced.

[BlooInBloo]

38. I don't recall saying that "the works of Locke had nothing to do with Rousseau's work"...

... That's all you. I will happily maintain, however, that there's no reason for anybody to read Locke except (a) for purely historical interest, or (b) to learn how to do something wrong.

[Goblinmonger]

40. Many of the founding fathers would disagree

I find a lot of what Locke has to say about property to be troubling and self-serving, but I don't think you can write him off. Though I'm not the one with the PhD from the best university in the world.

[BlooInBloo]

46. So much the worse for the founding fathers then. I'll take the considered opinions....

... of people who have devoted their life's work to the specific topic, as well as my own well-trained opinion, over that of a group of mostly farmers. No insult to farmers - they're just not who I look to for assessments of what's philosophically important.

Hell - lol - Nietzsche's Genealogy could be of more fundamental interest to social contract theory than anything Locke had to say. But Rousseau, Hobbes, and Rawls pretty much cover the important basics in the political section of social contract theory.

[Vilis Veritas]

39. Come on...

since you have a PHD, you should try to educate rather than alienate. Sometimes, people do not know their partner in a dance and inadvertantly step on their toes...

In regards to the Social Contract...I thought of Locke first, as well, he got more press back when I was in school...;-) and is more formally associated with influencing the founding fathers. His writings actually predate Rousseau, I believe by nearly 100 years...as well as those of Thomas Hobbes, which predate Locke's. Each author wrote on distinctly different aspects of the subject and I would suggest that each built upon the work of the others...Giants Stand on the Shoulders of the last generations Giants.

But then I am not a scholar of the social contract and which nit to pick when it comes to the intricacies of the subject. Please feel free to educate me further, I welcome intelligent discourse.

Peace.

edited to add: Of course, I should probably just shut up...sorry if I interupted...Peace.

[Mind_your_head]

5. Before everyone starts speaking outta their 'arse'....

A few 'definitions' to "know/live by?":

CONTRACT

Main Entry: 1con·tract
Pronunciation: 'kän-"trakt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin contractus, from contrahere to draw together, make a contract, reduce in size, from com- + trahere to draw
1 a : a binding agreement between two or more persons or parties; especially : one legally enforceable b : a business arrangement for the supply of goods or services at a fixed price <make parts on contract> c : the act of marriage or an agreement to marry
2 : a document describing the terms of a contract
3 : the final bid to win a specified number of tricks in bridge
4 : an order or arrangement for a hired assassin to kill someone <his enemies put out a contract on him>

-----------

CONSTITUTION

Main Entry: con·sti·tu·tion
Pronunciation: "kän(t)-st&-'tü-sh&n, -'tyü-
Function: noun
1 : an established law or custom : ORDINANCE
2 a : the physical makeup of the individual especially with respect to the health, strength, and appearance of the body <a hearty constitution> b : the structure, composition, physical makeup, or nature of something <the constitution of society>
3 : the act of establishing, making, or setting up
4 : the mode in which a state or society is organized; especially : the manner in which sovereign power is distributed
5 a : the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it b : a written instrument embodying the rules of a political or social organization
- con·sti·tu·tion·less /-l&s/ adjective

-----------

COVENANT

Main Entry: 1cov·e·nant
Pronunciation: 'k&v-n&nt, 'k&-v&-
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from present participle of covenir to be fitting, from Latin convenire
1 : a usually formal, solemn, and binding agreement : COMPACT
2 a : a written agreement or promise usually under seal between two or more parties especially for the performance of some action b : the common-law action to recover damages for breach of such a contract
- cov·e·nan·tal /"k&-v&-'nan-t&l/ adjective

-----------

Discuss. Carry-on......

[Adsos Letter]

6. Arse?

[Mind_your_head]

12. *ss - sorry I was still thinking it was 'speak like a pirate' day

:eyes:

[Jed Dilligan]

18. We had a whole revolution

just to endure weird English spellings on our own website?

What's this world coming to?

[Jed Dilligan]

10. Word 2, 5 a

At what point in the state's usurpation of powers and failure at performing duties do the people's obligations stop applying?

[Mind_your_head]

15. Good question.....I'm quite sure that I'm not ready/willing/qualified(?) to give a public

opinion of *my* interpretation/thoughts about it. But the question is very good 'food for thought'.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

13. The people, and their Representatives, are responsible for

adherence to its terms should the term contract apply.

[Jed Dilligan]

19. Do elected officials sign a contract the way other employees do?

I suddenly feel ignorant about all this.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

23. They swear under oath to uphold this contract....

[liberal renegade]

20. It's nothing but a goddamned piece of paper...

Bush's words, not mine....

[Jed Dilligan]

21. Like any contract...

[Mind_your_head]

28. The whole fabric of a society disintegrates when people don't

live up to the terms of the contracts (promises) that they've made (and the terms of the penalties when they are unable/fail to live up to their contracts/promises).

It's a very grave - yet important - thing you're bringing up about our constitution and the current 'leaders' who HAVE SWORN to uphold/defend it (although I don't believe that they agreed to what the penalities for betrayal would be.....maybe they swore/agreed that that's best left up to 'us'? :think:

[proud patriot]

25. It's our tool to reign in our Gov.

The Constitution is ours .

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

27. It dictates the structure of government, how laws will be enacted, and the rights of the people.

Without it, contracts cannot be enforced. So, it is more than a contract. A Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the peoples occupying that land. Neither the government or its people can break it (although, obviously, both do).

Your take on a constitution, any constitution, is perceptive.

Who enforces what amounts to an agreement (a contract) about the structure of a nation WHEN those who are suppose to enforce it, breaks it?

:scared:

[BlooInBloo]

29. Back in the Dark Ages, people thought that eating walnuts would make you smart...

... because they looked like brains.

We haven't come so far, we Americans.

[treestar]

41. Yes

We the People give the government our power to do whatever the hell we want to do, or let ourselves limit it, in the interest of the common good.

That's what so few people realize. All of us can do whatever we want to do. We only decide not to out of respect for the rules and that the rules will be enforced on our behalf, too.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

45. Not true. The Constitution PREVENTS totalitarianism over the people.

What the Constitution, those who drafted it, did not anticipate is such absolute human evil willing to destroy a step towards human progress.

The "founding fathers" thought themselves pragmatic idealists, attempting to cast some sense of equality unto the human existence. They did the best they could as have any earnest man and woman and child in this life. Unfortunately, the most dangerous predator on this earth,...is always human. On the flip side, the most potentially gracious being on earth,...is, also, human.

We choose, as human beings, how we impact not only our own lives but also the life around us.

[treestar]

50. That's true, it does prevent majority rule, which could easily make

rules to exclude a minority otherwise.

The rule of law comes into play, for the First Amendment to say no long can be made allowing a religious majority to make rules to the disadvantage of those not in their religion. We "give up" our chance to have our religion made official, whatever that might have been, in return for the chance not to have to risk our religion ending up outlawed. So that makes it a contract.

We also need to cultivate more respect for the rule of law. It seems to be falling off, and it's important for the functioning of this particular constitution. Many an average American I meet today seems to think the Courts just interfere with the will of the majority and they appear to believe that it is wrong that the Court can do that.

[genie_weenie]

48. The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation.

Lysander Spooner

http://www.lysanderspooner.org/bib_new.htm