(09-26-2020, 12:10 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote:

(09-26-2020, 11:01 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: The constitution is almost 250 years old. If the founding fathers saw what the country had turned into, I'm pretty sure they'd want some changes made as well. The United States looks and runs nothing like it did when the constitution was written. It's become outdated in some areas.

Maybe or maybe not. 

If there’s something so important to require an amendment, then it should be easy to get enough support to amend it. If the support doesn’t exist, then it shouldn’t be so easily changed. Support for random causes fluctuates all the time. What may be supported today may not be supported tomorrow, and if it’s an easy process to change it, you could find yourself on the wrong end of that change.

That already happened with the system we have.
Look at the 18th amendment and then look at the 21st.
It's kind of illogical, but we dealt with it, and we survived.
In my mind it's preferable to deal with a bit more topsy-turvy like that,
Than to witness the court make a decision that most people and most states disagree with,
And watch our political parties reorganize around upholding or overturning that decision,
And watch the "overturn" party get more and more judges,
And watch those judges say, "oops, sorry, Stare Decisis!"

---