Should the US Constitution still play a prominent role in American politics?

In the infancy of a newly born United States, James Madison invited A sincere and steadfast co-operation in promoting such a reconstruction of our political system as would provide for the permanent liberty and happiness of the United States (Ketcham, 1990:669). This emboldening statement arose from the near collpase of the United States. The USs first Constitution (articles of confederation) was being undermined by overwhelming debt and contentious inter-state conflicts (). Madison, soon to be the father of a new Constitution proposed that the states meet in an effort to overcome ever more evident conflictions in the Articles of Confederation. The result of this, after much ideological wrangling at the Constitutional convention in Philadelphia, and considerable nuance on James Madisons part was; The constitutional reallocation of powers to create a new form of government, unprecedented under the sun. Every previous national authority either had been centralized or else had been a confederation of sovereign states. The new American system was neither one nor the other; it was a mixture of both. (McDonald, 1985:276). However it is important to note the influence and impact of Thomas Jeffersons earlier Declaration of Independence, which set the precedent needed for the Constitution to be assembled by laying down the legal and philosophical foundations that the United States would be built on, as well as containing a vicious diatribe against Britain and King George III. The Declaration As a compromise between government as a necessary evil, and in the course of a bill of complaint against a hereditary monarch, the Declaration proposed the idea of the consent of the governed, and thus launched the experiment we call American, or sometimes Jeffersonian, democracy (Hitchens, 2005:26). This experiment with its unique state-federal balance has become the longest standing Constitution in existence, a testament to its durability when the average life expectancy of a Constitution is a mere 19 years. (http://www.uchicago.edu/features/20100920_constitution.shtml). When interpreting the Constitution it is important to analyze and understand the people behind it, in particular Jefferson, due both to his authorship of the highly influential Declaration and his close relationship with the Constitutions principle author James Madison. These two were very close ideologically, and formed a formidable political partnership, with Madison even going so far as to become the proxy voice of Jefferson whenever the latter felt the need to stay on the tactical sidelines (Hitchens, 2005:86). Thus we can draw the logical conclusion that due to this close friendship, vastness of correspondence, and similarity in legislature, that the Jeffersonian influence on the Constitution was considerable. Indeed it is not uncommon for Jefferson to be referred to as the Author of America (). During the period between the signing of the Declaration, and the ratification of the Constitution, Jefferson alluded to the ridiculousness of religious tests for public office. A highly ironic revelation considering how contemporary US politics is full with candidates willing to profess his or her love and devotion for the Lord Jesus Christ. How is it possible that the country which was founded on the values of science, reason, and rationality derived from the Enlightenment is betraying these values by back peddling into the world of religious superstition and mistrust of science (Otto, 2011).

In fact the question of religion is often raised when talking about interpretations of the Constitution. In regards to the role and influence of religion on US politics, the distinctive role of the Constitution is a salient one that needs to be more actively enforced. Jefferson and Madison were quite clear in their intentions when drafting the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom and First Amendment of the Constitution respectively, and made this known in their carefully worded writings, Jefferson declaring that; our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, more than our opinions in physics or geometry (Jefferson, 1777) and Madison echoing these sentiments when he addressed the Virginia assembly Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty, may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, needs them not (Madison, 1785:8). This has become a pressing issue in contemporary America due to the power and influence religion still holds over a considerable proportion of the American population. A militant religious right has recently emerged, demanding the teaching of intelligent design alongside scientific theories in classrooms, as well as instructing teachers to teach their students that astrology controls the weather (Otto, 2011). This kind of pseudo-science and charlantry is incredibly dangerous because it is diluting and poisoning the minds of children and the uneducated (Weisberg, 2005). Jefferson had written; Whenever people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government (Jefferson, 1789). But when only 45% of Americans believe in evolution (Otto, 2011), it is obvious that they are not being wee informed, and if that is so, when so easily manipulated by cretinous individuals, how can the citizens of America be expected to make decisions in their own interest? Thus the credulous natures of the individuals are exploited with ardence by politicians using pseudo-science and charlantry to advance their own means. Completely undermining the key tenets of democracy and perhaps even supporting a more Hobbesian philosophy of government, something that is a near polar opposite of the ideals of the Founders. Elsewhere the UN intends to pass thoughtless anti-blasphemy laws that offend our most intrinsic rights of speech and expression, which must be negated by essential point of the first amendment to the Constitution; that a religiously neutral state is the chief guarantee of religious pluralism. Thus the Constitution is supposed to enforce the states neutrality in matters of religion (Hitchens, 2006). This neutrality is being infringed upon and has been with ever growing vigour since Madison found himself incapable of refusing demands for a national day of prayer during the struggles of the war of 1812, which he privately declared to be unconstitutional (Madison, 1946) Many critics cite the antiquity of the Constitution, claiming it no longer relevant in a constantly changing and developing world (http://newamerica.net/node/27023). But this ignores the original inspiration of the Constitution and the Enlightenment philosophy it enshrined. In the masterfully crafted Declaration of Independence, in many ways a promulgation to the subsequent constitution, Thomas Jefferson radicalized Enlightenment thinker John Lockes Second Treatise on Civil Government by grounding human equality on the observable facts of nature and the human condition (Hitchens, 2005:25), avoiding any equivocality in branding these certain unalienable rights applicable to every individual of the human species. This produces a conundrum for anti-constitutionalists, these rights are either unalienable or they are not, self-evident or not, the careful wording of the document leaves little room for ambivalence. These views were echoed by the great emancipator Abraham

Lincoln who described the fundamental values of the Declaration as an abstract truth, applicable to all men and all times (Morel, 2000:54), this endorsement delivered by a man known for his integrity and benevolence (http://rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln87.html). However it was Thomas Paine, the man who was able to spark the American revolution with the largest achievement in the history of pamphleteering (Hitchens, 2006:30) in his vicious riposte against the Britisih monarachy and appeal to Americans pride and dignity in Common Sense. It was in his later work The Rights of Man however that he was able to present these natural rights in the most lucid manner: putting the effect before the cause; for as man must have existed before governments existed, there necessarily was a time when governments did not exist, and consequently there could originally exist no governors to form such a compact with. The fact therefore must be, that individuals themselves, each in his own personal and sovereign right, entered into a compact with each other to produce a government: and this is the only mode in which governments have a right to arise, and the only principle on which they have a right to exist (Hitchens, 2006:94) Showing that Democracy must then be the natural form of government. These unalienable rights were later drawn up in a contract between the people of the United States and their government, and make up the foundation of their Constitution. It can be argued however that some parts of the Constitution are superfluous or perhaps out-dated, this degree of error or is understandable as it is the only document in history to be decided by committee. But inbuilt into the Constitution is an amendment system just for that purpose, so instead of starting from a blank slate as promoted by Jefferson Let us go on then perfecting it, by adding, by way of amendment to the Constitution, those powers which time and trail show are still wanting (Jefferson). A popular example of the irrelevance of the Constitution is to bring up the 2nd Amendment rights. And cite the fact the federal government has not brought in any gun-control laws. This ignores the entire premise of the Constitution, explained succincntly by Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist; It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system that the State governments will, in all possible contingences, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. (Hamilton). This countenance of States rights is of particular importance because it was coming from a staunch Federalist, who was a distinct rival of Jefferson The reality, that with questions regarding the Constitutions place in modern America the emphasis often needs to be placed on whether it is being enforced and understood as it was originally intended be. This is preferable to the type of zealotry, fanatism and .. that is the driving force behind many of the individuals and lobbying groups that are attempting to crown the United States a Christian nation and teach mythical nonsense in science classrooms. This clash between education and religion stems right back to the birth of the United States, and it is important we take note of Jeffersons opinions of religious sects that were attempting to forestall the advance of education and science, stating that all sects dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight; and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversion of the duperies in which they live (Jefferson)

Have conditions changed so much that the constitution should not be prominent?

he and most of his peers did not believe in a god who intervened in human affairs or in a god who had sent a son for a human sacrifice (founders)

y y
y y y y y y y

McDonald, Forrest, Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1985) Jefferson, Thomas, Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom 1777

Jefferson, Thomas, Letter to Richard Price (8 January 1789) Ketcham, Ralph, James Madison: A Biography (University of Virginia Press, 1990) Hitchens, Christopher; Thomas Jefferson: Author of America (HarperCollins Publishers, 2005) Hitchens, Christopher; Thomas Paines Rights of Man (Atlantic Books, 2006) Hitchens, Christopher; Yes, the Founding Fathers Were Skeptics About Religion, (2006) http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/33005.html Morel, Lucas; Lincolns Sacred Effort: Defining Religions Role in American Self-Government (Lexington Books, 2000) Weisberg, Jacob; Evolution vs. Religion: Quit pretending theyre compatible (2005:http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_big_idea/2005/08/evolution_vs
_religion.html)

Madison, James, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments (1785) y Madison, James, Detached Memoranda (1946) y Otto, Shawn Lawrence, Decline And Fall (New Scientist, 29 Oct 2011)

It is important that this is tackled in order to pave the way for future generations, the messages of the Constitution, and more importantly the Enlightenment should not be squandered, and the lessons learned from the vindictiveness and Saturnalia of past ages that have been dominated by autocracy and despotism are remembered. It is essential that in the hecticness of modern times we do not forget the salience of the foundation of the modern secular nation.