MrPresident
Anglo-Saxon Liberal
Which is better a written Constitution (i.e. America) or a unwritten Constitution (i.e. Britain)?
Constitution Thread
- Thread starter MrPresident
- Start date
Switch625
I don't care.
Written. It's probably just my American bias, though.
Amazone Queen
Chieftain
written Constitution.
Simon Darkshade
Mysterious City of Gold
None, or a very vague unwritten one that the Leader can interpret as is his desire.
ComradeDavo
Formerly God
Giant Radioactive Monkey Constitution
joespaniel
Unescorted Settler
The people's choice.Originally posted by ComradeDavo
Giant Radioactive Monkey Constitution
MrPresident
Anglo-Saxon Liberal
There are times when I fear democracy. Luckily there are many more times when I fear dictatorship.Giant Radioactive Monkey Constitution
joespaniel
Unescorted Settler
Damn, I was just going to post that about the English. Damn.Originally posted by MrPresident
"Give the people a choice between the serious and the nonsense and they will always choose the nonsense."
That is how I explain America.
Alcibiaties of Athenae
Imperator
Written, of course, where your rights are spelled out.
It is far more difficult to remove written rights then unwritten ones, and print has a powerful effect.
It is far more difficult to remove written rights then unwritten ones, and print has a powerful effect.
MrPresident
Anglo-Saxon Liberal
Depends on which font you use.
It is also far more difficult to change written rights than unwritten ones. And different times demand different rights.
cgannon64
BOB DYLAN'S ROCKIN OUT!
...which is why I think a written one is better. Can't be used for the leader's advantage as easily. They still can be twisted around, but not as easily as an unwritten one.
Surprise, I disagree with Darkshade.
CG
Alcibiaties of Athenae
Imperator
Sorry, couldn't resist.
joespaniel
Unescorted Settler
Where have I seen that before...
joespaniel
Unescorted Settler
Yes.
It is docked in Boston Harbor, where I visited this past spring.
Simon Darkshade
Mysterious City of Gold
Originally posted by cgannon64
...which is why I think a written one is better. Can't be used for the leader's advantage as easily. They still can be twisted around, but not as easily as an unwritten one.
Surprise, I disagree with Darkshade.
CG
Tsk. The Leader knows when to use it, and his advantage and the advantage of the Nation are one and the same. There are times when he needs to be able to do it easily and quickly. All part of the Darkshadist Spartan doctrine of the Leader.
And one would not expect you to agree with me yet, as you are but young, and have a peanut for a brain.
Greadius
:yeah:
Perhaps you could enlighten us to the virtues of unwritten rights. They kind of remind me of unwritten laws, to which I'm more frequently the victim than the beneficiary.
That sounds like a dictator speaking
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Written. The American legal system owes a great deal of homage to British Common Law traditions however. still it is better to have things in black and white. Even in Common Law areas, like Torts for example, there are periodic compilations of the central issues called "Restatements" which render the subject back to ink on paper.
J
J
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Sometimes yes; sometimes no. Unwritten laws tend to be elusive and difficult to stamp out even if you CAN change the written law. Take for example racial segregation. Sacred cows have long lives.
J
jpowers
Emperor
Doesn't appear to matter to the current US leadership.
