Reasons Why Liberals Are Wrong About The Constitution

1514 Words4 Pages

The Liberals and Conservatives have expressed that they support the Constitution and the values symbolized in it, but they constantly fight about the government’s power when it comes to criminal justice, moral regulatory, the economic regulatory powers and its war powers (Lentz, T.,2013). Liberals are very easily angered when someone accuses them or suggests that they do not understand or support the Constitution. Unfortunately, Liberals have stopped believing in the principles of the Constitution but the reasons why are not clear. We must now try to figure out why Liberals are wrong about the Constitution. There are several reason why Liberals are wrong about the Constitution. Liberal say that they do not like the Constitution because they …show more content…

They believe that it is the duty of the government to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve problems (studentnewsdaily.com). Liberals believe that the Executive Branch should have the power of a unilateral government (“imperial presidency”). They believe that this would be the best way for Americans to achieve equality and prevent social injustices because it would give the Executive Branch the power to modify laws that are passed by Congress. Unfortunately for Liberals, when the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution they ensured that there were checks and balances so that none of the three branches of government would grow to powerful and to limit the government’s power. They also ensured that there was a separation of powers among the three branches “so that one branch could not create, or abolish, any other branch. This has been one of the basic governing doctrines even though it is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution” (Lentz, T.,2013). The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution in a manner that the legislative branch would make the laws, the executive branch would carry out the laws and the judicial branch to interpret the laws. However, after the Great Depression the …show more content…

Civil liberties include the First Amendment which guarantees the right to the freedoms of speech, press, and religion. (totallyhistory.com). The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress grievances” (conservapedia.com). Liberals are wrong when they challenge the freedom of speech that is given to every individual under the first amendment. According to Lenz, “The civil liberties guaranteed in the Constitution do not, as a rule, give individuals a right, they place limits on the government’s power to limit individual freedom” (Lenz, 2013). Liberals have passed laws that limit individuals and the press freedom of speech. The case of Schenck vs. United States is a classic example of how liberals have challenged the First Amendment. Charles Schenck was a member of the Populist Party who did not agree with the United States involvement in World War I (WWI). He handed out flyers opposing the war because he felt that the war was “a capitalist enterprise to exploit workers, and compared the military draft with slavery”. He was convicted under the Espionage Act, which he appealed to the Supreme Court. He appealed his conviction because

Show More
Related

  • Understanding the Controversies of the US Constitution

    1132 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Constitution of the United States is one of the most iconic and important documents of all time. However, when it was first generated, its writing and ratification caused some major concerns. The purpose of the Constitution was to address the great number of issues of a new nation. To be more specific, the Constitution was meant to resolve the political, economic, and social problems of the country. Nevertheless, the document spurred much discussion and concern over people’s rights, the economy, and political corruption.

    Read More

  • Modern Interpretation of The First Amendment

    1663 Words  | 4 Pages

    Through the years many changes have taken place, and technologies have been discovered, yet our Constitution remains. Some say that the Constitution was written for people hundreds of years ago, and in turn is out of step with the times. Yet its principals and guidelines have held thus far. The framers would be pleases that their great planning and thought have been implemented up until this point. However this does not compensate for the fact, that the we the people have empowered the government more so than our fore fathers had intended. Citizens were entrusted with the duty to oversee the government, yet so many times they are disinterested and only seem to have an opinion when the government’s implications affect them. As time has changed so has the American people, we often interpret our freedoms in a self serving manner, disregarding the good of the whole and also the good for the future. Thus there are no true flaws in the Constitution, it appears that the conflict emerges in the individual and their self, and poses question when we must decide when to compromise the morals that our Constitution was founded on, or when to stick to what we know is right and honest.

    Read More

  • The Inefficiency of the U.S. Constitution

    1287 Words  | 3 Pages

    The United States' Constitution is one the most heralded documents in our nation's history. It is also the most copied Constitution in the world. Many nations have taken the ideals and values from our Constitution and instilled them in their own. It is amazing to think that after 200 years, it still holds relevance to our nation's politics and procedures. However, regardless of how important this document is to our government, the operation remains time consuming and ineffective. The U.S. Constitution established an inefficient system that encourages careful deliberation between government factions representing different and sometimes competing interests.

    Read More

  • Essay Arguments Against Ratifying The Constitution

    1000 Words  | 2 Pages

    The U.S Constitution is recognized as a document that secures basic rights for citizens and structures the American national government. Before the Constitution, the states had all the power and the national government was very weak. Therefore, the creation of the Constitution was necessary to grant the national government power. Even though, the Constitution was signed in 1787, there was still debate in that the Constitution gave the national government too much power. Some of the individuals whom opposed the Constitution where Patrick Henry and George Mason. Patrick Henry became the leader of the opponents, because of his strong legal and rhetoric skills. On the other hand, George Mason was a patriot during the American Revolution, whom believed in the inalienable rights of the people. These two man were important figures that argued the dangers ratifying the Constitution would bring and that the Constitution would give too much power to the national government.

    Read More

  • American Transformation, 1800-1890

    1062 Words  | 3 Pages

    When learning about the reception of these resolutions by the constitutional convention, part of me isn’t surprised, given the prevailing views at the time; another part of me is shocked that these men can simply ignore the wrongs that have been so clearly laid out in front of them. It reminds me that we have wrongs that are allowed in today’s society, which may be more subtle, but no less important, and are ignored by our representatives.

    Read More

  • The Ratification of the United States Constitution

    961 Words  | 2 Pages

    People debated on the illegality of the Constitution’s formation. Those who were involved in the public debate about the Constitution considered the creation of the document as an illegal act. Some Anti-Federalists believed that the men sent to the constitutional convention had surpassed the limits of the assignment originally given to them, which was to modestly adjust the Articles of Confederation. Federalists disputed that the articles needed to be eliminated rath...

    Read More

  • Federalists and Anti-Federalists

    1659 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Constitution, when first introduced, set the stage for much controversy in the United States. The two major parties in this battle were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists, such as James Madison, were in favor of ratifying the Constitution. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists, such as Patrick Henry and Richard Henry Lee, were against ratification. Each party has their own beliefs on why or why not this document should or should not be passed. These beliefs are displayed in the following articles: Patrick Henry's "Virginia Should Reject the Constitution," Richard Henry Lee's "The Constitution Will Encourage Aristocracy," James Madison's "Federalist Paper No. 10," and "The Letters to Brutus." In these documents, many aspects of the Constitution, good and bad, are discussed. Although the Federalists and Anti-Federalists had very conflicting views, many common principals are discussed throughout their essays. The preservation of liberty and the effects of human nature are two aspects of these similarities. Although the similarities exist, they represent and support either the views of the Federalists or the Anti-Federalists.

    Read More

  • Politics and Poverty

    1251 Words  | 3 Pages

    Liberals usually have the perspective that the government should help the people much more than they do presently, with more programs such as welfare (etc.). Liberals generally agree that the government should intervene, regulate, and promote the economy and ensure fairness in society always. Government policies are indeed needed and necessary for citizens to fulfill their daily needs. Most also do agree with a "free-market" society, however, they stress the need for government policies.

    Read More

  • Bill of Rights

    1623 Words  | 4 Pages

    In 1791, the Bill of Rights, consisting of 10 amendments, was ratified into the constitution. The document’s purpose was to spell out the liberties of the people that the government could not infringe upon. Considered necessary by many at the time of its development, the Bill of Rights became the cause for a huge debate between two different factions: The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists were those who thought that there should be a new Union created with a strong centralized government and individual regional governments. They felt that it was not necessary for there to be a bill of rights because it was implied that those rights the Constitution did not specifically state would be handed down to the states. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists were opposed to such a form of government on the grounds that the Constitution, in which it was outlined, lacked clarity in the protections of the individuals. The Anti-Federalists—whose memory of British oppression was still fresh in their minds—wanted certain rights and guarantees that were to be apart of the constitution (Glasser 1991). A clear demonstration of the Anti-Federalist attitude was performed by Samuel Bryan, who published a series of essays named the ‘Cenitnal Essays,’ which “assailed the sweeping power of the central government, the usurpation of state sovereignty, and the absence of a bill of rights guaranteeing individual liberties such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion (Bran 1986).” Of course, the freedoms stated above are a portion and not the whole of The Bill of Rights. Ultimately, The Bill of Rights was adopted to appease the Anti-Federalists, whose support was necessary to ratify the constitution, and who believed that without the liberties granted therein, the new constitution—that they thought was vague and granted too much power to the central government—would give way to an elite tyrannical government.

    Read More

  • The Importance Of The US Constitution

    1142 Words  | 3 Pages

    “The Constitution leaves in its wake a long legacy, forever shaping the fate of many other countries. Whether those countries are currently in a state favorable to liberty or not, it is undeniable that the U.S. Constitution’s principles have caused people to rethink how to organize their political systems” (Hang). Time has only added value to the Constitution, for every time we reference it in our lives it is a testament of our trust and loyalty in what it states about our rights as individuals and the role the government plays in our lives. When it was written, the Constitution was the law of the land that gave people rights they had previously lived without. Similarly, we live lives of choice and independence because of the same document while other countries limit all the rights we are guaranteed in the Constitution. Simply put, “The Constitution is important because it protects individual freedom, and its fundamental principles govern the United States. The Constitution places the government 's power in the hands of the citizens. It limits the power of the government and establishes a system of checks and balances”

    Read More

  • Civil Liberties

    1322 Words  | 3 Pages

    From the beginning, the United States Constitution has guaranteed the American people civil liberties. These liberties have given citizens rights to speak, believe, and act freely. The Constitution grants citizens the courage to express their mind about something they believe is immoral or unjust. The question is, how far are citizens willing to extend the meanings of these liberties? Some people believe that American citizens take advantage of their civil liberties, harming those around them. On the contrary, many other people feel that civil liberties are necessary tools to fight for their Constitutional rights.

    Read More

  • Why I Am Conservative

    733 Words  | 2 Pages

    A liberal in older days was not what one would be today; they were considered a person whom sought to use change, while a conservative is one who opposed change. The differences between a liberal and a conservative is a wide gap that focuses upon the fundamental beliefs of those within each group. Pure liberals are people who show themselves as liberal on both economic policy and personal conduct. This means "that they want the government to reduce economic inequality, regulate business, tax the rich heavily, cure the (presumably) economic causes of crime, allow abortions, protect the rights of the accused, and guarantee the broadest possible freedoms of speech and press." (Wilson, 121)

    Read More

  • Legal Liberalism Case Study

    1483 Words  | 3 Pages

    Liberty is the right of the people to freely choose their way of life, behavior, or political views with limited restriction imposed by the law. While equality promises equal rights and opportunities for everyone regardless of race, gender, class or ability. Neutrality is based on the law remaining neutral in any conflicts thus allowing each individual to determine their own conception of good and evil. Liberalism recognizes that law is no more than a human construct, an artifact of human agency, socially and historically located, and therefore capable of renovation. This is a central concept in legal liberalism based on the idea that law is malleable which is a stark contrast to natural law theorist who believe in a single good or evil. Liberal theorist believe that people have the right to liberty, equality and neutrality which allows them to define their own self. However liberal theorist also recognize that humans are social beings and that we live in conditions of interdependence, thus one of the roles of law is to facilitate social interaction. Liberalism also recognizes that sometimes one person’s liberty infringes that of another so it is important to protect rights. Liberalism accepts some of the key arguments of Artifactualism. It recognizes that law is a human construct and it attempts to develop rules and principles.

    Read More

  • Liberal Democracy Essay

    1667 Words  | 4 Pages

    In American history, the elements of the American liberal democratic tradition that were most relevant in the society were individual freedom, economic freedom, equality, and democracy. Liberal democracy refers to the people being the rulers with guarantees of individual freedom and equality and that it focuses on individual liberty as an essential to protecting that liberty. The two biggest challenges that liberal democracy faces are one balancing equality and liberty and the other is balancing the government’s needs for individual freedom and legitimacy. Liberal democracy plays a major role in our society to limit government power in interfering with liberty while as it ensures that the government protects liberties. The elements of

    Read More

  • Negative Liberalism

    1873 Words  | 4 Pages

    All liberals agree that the state is necessarily a coercive power and therefore ought to be minimised lest it encroach on individual freedom, one of the key values in liberalism. However, liberals were also the first to seek a justification for the state on rational grounds, such as through consent theory, their predecessors having generally accepted the state as divinely ordained. This shows that the state is clearly not something to be completely opposed, as it is for anarchists, but rather is seen as necessary to perform certain functions. While liberals do not tend to believe human nature to be flawed, as conservatives do, they do believe that human self-interest needs to be tamed in order to protect us from one another and maintain law

    Read More

More about Reasons Why Liberals Are Wrong About The Constitution

Open Document