![world_map11[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/s6yPVk5.jpg "world_map11[1].jpg")
What is the most perfect and enduring legal document in human history and why is it the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights?
>>542343
"Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence and deem them like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well; I belonged to it and labored with it. It deserved well of its country. It was very like the present but without the experience of the present; and forty years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading; and this they would say themselves were they to rise from the dead."
>>542343
It's Magna Carta
>>542362
Thomas Jefferson said many things in his life, many of them contradictory and many of them not very intelligent.
>>542343
>let's rip off the 1689 Bill of Rights, throw in some Magna Carta, and make provisions based on what made us butthurt in 1776 and call it an inspired and original document: the document
>>542441
I don't see the Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights still being used in 2016, do you?
Yes, the US Constitution originally stood on the shoulders of giants, but now it is the only one of them standing period.
>>542453
>I don't see the Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights still being used in 2016, do you?
...yes?
>>542441
>made up butthurt in 1776
Go ahead and find where in the Constitution it mentions that, assuming of course you actually read it limey.
>>542343
http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/1776-hutchinson-strictures-upon-the-declaration-of-independence
>>542427
Which does nothing to denounce that quotation or its relevance to the current discussion. Try harder with your rhetoric there, Sophist.
>>542466
>Go ahead and find where in the Constitution it mentions that
Amendment III. Reeks of Bostonite butthurt.
>>542473
That's weird, it reeks of freedom to me. It also reeks of incorporating new rights in light of past abuses. Is that something you think constitutes butthurt?
>>542469
But the Constitution is a sacred document. The fact that Europe doesn't view the documents that grant them rights as sacred and sacrosanct is why Europe has such little freedom now (and in the past). How many constitutions and republics has France gone through since the French Revolution?
>>542479
>past abuses
It was legally sanctioned, my friend, by the legitimate authority. Unlike the rebellion.
Daily reminder your government would consider the Founding Fathers terrorists and atheists
>>542484
>muh natural born rights
When will Americans move on from entry-level sixteenth century English philosophy? I bet you don't even know who John Lilburne is.
>>542362
>implying people actually give a shit about the constitution and bill of rights
Americans only bring up >Muh Constitution (only their interpretation of it of course) when it can be used to support their motives. It's nothing more than an appeal to tradition. Judging how our modern laws shit all over the Founder's intent, anyone attempting to put any authoritative meaning to the Constitution is blowing hot air up your ass.
>>542505
The idea that rights are derived from God or nature insure that they are not abused. IF you have an idea of rights as being granted to you by the state you don't have rights, you have privileges that can be revoked at any time. As can be seen in the history of Europe.
>>542519
>failing to grasp that was Jefferson's whole point in making that statement
>>542519
Unconstintitutional modern laws don't reflect any flaws with the Constitution itself or what it was intended to do, it reflects modern corruption and power abuse by those currently running things. Yes, a Constitution is only as good as the people implementing and defending it, but the Constitution itself is still superior to anything else conceived of to secure the rights of individuals.
>>542473
>Bostonite butthurt
I'm curious, does being forced to share your house with foreign soldiers sound fun to you?
>I can't think of a quip about taking in lots of refugees right now, sorry.
>>542541
Not the guy you're responding to, but just for clarity's sake, does your statement mean that you're for state level government restrictions on firearms subject only to that own state's constitution?
Because the constitution was not intended to limit state power in such a fashion, only the power of the federal government.
>>542665
I personally think that quartering troops in your house during times of high threat to national security when it is prudent (like if a foreign power laying siege to your hometown, and you live in a concrete bunker on a hill) should be a civic duty. So yes, there probably was a lot of Bostonian butthurt poured into the writing of that particular sentence.
>>542534
meant to reply to OP, idk why I clicked your post
>>542541
The Constitution gave or at least implied the Judicial Branch with unlimited power over law. It created a bicameral congress in regards to small population and amount of states (~25 senators and ~60 congressmen in a nation of ~5 million). It set rules on adding new states but never mentioned the legality or illegality of succession leading to succession threats of various regions of the country and culminating in the Civil War.
>Constitution itself is still superior to anything else conceived of to secure the rights of individuals.
The early constitution didn't have anything to do with individual rights as the Bill of Rights was not incorporated upon the states, it only policed laws made by the Federal Government. It also condoned chattel slavery.
>>542665
>foreign soldiers
>foreign
But they weren't foreign, they were all Englishmen
>>542782
>civic duty
Rights are meant to protect you from government intrusion on your freedoms, not obligate you to do whatever the government tells you to do just because they claim there's some emergency or other. But I guess that mindset explains why Europeans feel they have a "civic duty" to take in millions of immigrants and house them in their own homes and clean up after their messes.
Modern Europeans are really confusing.
>>542792
>not knowing about Hessians
>2016
>Ishygddt
>>542343
>implying it isn't the English 1689 Bill of Rights
>>543920
I doubt Hessians were stationed in Boston prior to the Revolution
