Friday, July 2, 2010

Should We Always Stick to Original Intent?

From everything I have read, our FF's were deeply opposed to the US maintaining a standing army. see, e.g.,
  • Federalist Papers 8, 24, 25, 26, 29, 41 (and maybe more, I stopped word searching there) ). see also
  • See also 'Freedom Daily'
  • “A standing army is one of the greatest mischief that can possibly happen” James Madison
And yet those who proclaim "original intent" as the only measure of our national life don't decry standing armies, or announce any acceptance that a changing world necessitates leaving "original intent" behind when appropriate.

The same changing world, IMO, necessitates leaving other aspects of "original intent:" what worked in an agrarian, barter economy world, is as inapplicable to today's world as relying on the several states' militias would be today

1 comment:

  1. If you don't want to stick to original intent, then you support no Constitution at all. There is no purpose for it if you don't start from intent and understanding. What is your alternative? Trusting the ruling class to make our decisions for us on every topic? Pure democracy?

    We know today's standing military is of no threat to our republic, correct? Do you expect Marines to bust down your door or storm the Capitol any minute now?

    How about we provide an Amendment stating a standing army is just fine (w/much more appropriate verbiage)?

    Provide an alternative.