Only to the extent that the views of other past political philosophers matter. I voted no, because that's something less than treating them as demigods.
Mainly this. Though I do believe that the views of the Founding Fathers should be taken into consideration for "if you don't learn from your past you're doomed to repeat it" reasons.
To expand upon this.
I'll first start off with this quote:
The Founding Fathers had radically different views from each other, so it's ultimately a meaningless term.
Not really an original part of my post/argument, but a nevertheless good point. It is kind of absurd that some politicians take a "love it or leave it" approach with Constitutional interpretation when the thing itself was actually a compromise between those who wanted to stay in the Confederation and those who wanted a very strong and centralized government. Basically, how can one be such a diehard defender of a
compromise to defend it religiously two hundred some odd years later?
And then of course we have to take into consideration of what those men valued at the time and what their thoughts on society were. Which brings in another quote:
Rule 1 of being Alfred: Never trust a man with more slaves than teeth.
Fact is, these were men who lived in the late 18th century and it is hard to view most of any of them (except maybe Aaron Burr) as "good" by our modern day standards. This was a society that viewed black people as property, were propagating the idea that women should stay in the home, would've laughed in your face if you suggested that voting is a right and not a privilege (though to be fair there are still some people who do believe this), literally punished people for dancing, seriously believed that Irish people were subhuman "vermin" with a natural predisposition towards violence and drunkedness, thought the only good Indians were dead ones, Jews and Roman Catholics were in concordance with Beelzebub, etc. etc.. And that's just the things I could think of off the top of my head.
So yes, while I don't believe the Constitution should be completely discarded and ignored (I believe the nation would've been much better off if some politicians were more religiously devout in following the Amendments on privacy rights and free speech, for instance), I don't think it's too incredibly absurd to view it as a "living document" that is subject to revision, given the progress of society.
Poll
