Constitution Thread

Which is Better?

  • Written Constitution

    Votes: 29 67.4%
  • Unwritten Constitution

    Votes: 3 7.0%
  • Giant Radioactive Monkey Constitution

    Votes: 11 25.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
Unwritten, of course.
 
What the heck is an unwritten constitution?

Do you have "oral reciters" that speak it out loud in court?

Or do you just make it up as you go?

Written is good, and the written constitution of the USA is the best.
Without it, we are NOTHING.
 
Once again, the American and British Constitutions are just no match for the radioactive monkey Constitution.
 
Constitutions (written or implied) have the problem of translation and interpretation. No-one can be sure exactly what was meant, as the language used is suitably vague. The perception that the constitution exists and is valid is far more important than its form.
 
Written of course, what's the point of an unwritten constitution? That sounds like something associated with fantasy land. :p


Originally posted by ozscott75
Constitutions (written or implied) have the problem of translation and interpretation.
I can see the problem with the interpretation but translation? :confused:
 
Originally posted by Hitro

I can see the problem with the interpretation but translation? :confused:

Have you ever read anything in Middle English?

The translation comes in where the original document was written some time before the present, where language has changed.

I also believe that 'Legalese' is a language wholly separate from English. ;)
 
It seems most posters at the forum cannot make the correct choice between George Bush, Tony Blair, and a giant radioactive monkey! I know which one I prefer... :lol: :lol:

In all seriousness I voted for the giant radioactive monkey constitution merely to demonstrate... nothing at all. :D
 
voted for giant radioactive monkey constitution, because it would last for ever (the radioactivity makes it immortal) and if some megalomanic dictator (like hitler, mussolini, stalin, bush and darkshade) wants to change it, then would the giant radioactive monkey beat the crap out of him. i don't think a written or unwritten constitution could do anything like that, right?
 
Originally posted by ozscott75
I also believe that 'Legalese' is a language wholly separate from English. ;)
:lol:
Yeah, that has a point.
Still that's probably more a problem of interpretation...

Concerning the Middle English I can only say that I don't think it's good to never overwork a constitution in so many years that even the language changed completely.
 
what's the point of an unwritten constitution?
Before America makes a law there are two questions it asks:
1) Should this law be a law?
2) Is this law constitutional?

In Britain we only ask the first question which is why we have strict gun legislation and other such laws.
 
In the future, we will have the constitution and other legal codes hardwired into our neural connections. This way, Americans will continue to be gun-toting, freely-speaking and worshipping pursuers of happiness whether they like it or not.
 
excuse me if it sounds stupid but I didnt know you had the costitution that way in England, how do you interprete the laws?
thanx
 
Originally posted by MrPresident
Before America makes a law there are two questions it asks:
1) Should this law be a law?
2) Is this law constitutional?

In Britain we only ask the first question which is why we have strict gun legislation and other such laws.
In Germany we ask the same question as America does and we have strict gun legislation too...

Okay, we're also desperately searching for new rules, but that's another story.:crazyeye: ;)
 
Originally posted by MrPresident
Before America makes a law there are two questions it asks:
1) Should this law be a law?
2) Is this law constitutional?

In Britain we only ask the first question which is why we have strict gun legislation and other such laws.
Which is why I voted the American way, and a big reason I choose to live in the States.
 
Back
Top Bottom