ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Jason Dzubow on Political Asylum

Why It Is Offensive to Read the Constitution

Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.

I may belong to the last generation of Americans who make analogies to Eddie Haskell, Wally Cleaver's two-faced friend from Leave It to Beaver who used to give Beaver "the business" and then turn around and feign sweetness towards his mother.  Mrs. Cleaver never bought Eddie's act, but she was always too polite to say anything.  In the current scenario, the House Republicans are Eddie Haskell and the American People are June Cleaver. 


 


Golly Gee Willikers! What's wrong with reading the Constitution?

The House Republicans read the Constitution at the start of the new Congress, and then dared anyone to object: What red-blooded American could oppose reading the Constitution, they ask with feigned incredulity.  I object, and I think all Americans should too. 


So what's wrong with reading the Constitution?  The problem, of course, is not the Constitution itself, but the underlying message, delivered with a wink: We Republicans and Tea Partiers-not you-own this document.  It is ours to interpret.  We-not you-know what it means.  We'll explain it to you in our folksy, no nonsense, commonsensical style.  We'll use words like "originalism," "Judeo-Christian," and "American exceptionalism."  No reasonable person--no real American--could possibly hold any other view of our founding document.  It's so simple, the Republicans tell us, even a liberal could understand.


But the Constitution does not belong to the Republicans, or the Tea Partiers.  It belongs to all Americans.  To everyone.  The triumph and the tragedy of the Constitution is that it is subject to different interpretations.  The search for certainty in the document is a red herring.  In the 1920s and 30s, the search for certainty led many countries to turn to the Übermensch, the strong father figure who promised security in a dangerous and uncertain world.  We all know how that turned out.  As adults, we must accept that certainty is an illusion. 


And while the lack of certainty might be discomfiting, this is also the brilliance of our founding document.  It requires vigorous debate.  It requires engagement on substantive issues.  Without the uncertainty of the Constitution, we would not have had the great or the terrible decisions that shaped our nation: Dred Scott, Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, Bush v. Gore.  The Constitution's ambiguity led us to debate the important issues of our time, but the document has also given us an historic framework and a legal process for those debates.   


They say, we are who we are because of, and in spite of our parents.  We as a nation are what we are because of and in spite of the Constitution.  By attempting to seize exclusive control of this document through a seemingly innocent, Eddie Haskell-like reading, Conservatives want to force their interpretation upon us and to cut off debate.  They did the same thing with the American flag, turning it into a symbol for the Right, worn on every "real American's" lapel.  Co-opting jingoistic symbols of patriotism is one thing, but when they try to make us swallow their version of the Constitution and no other, we need to stand up and say no.  That is why the Republican's reading of the Constitution in the House was so offensive. 


Originally posted on the Asylumist: www.Asylumist.com.

Submit "Why It Is Offensive to Read the Constitution" to Facebook Submit "Why It Is Offensive to Read the Constitution" to Twitter Submit "Why It Is Offensive to Read the Constitution" to Google Submit "Why It Is Offensive to Read the Constitution" to StumbleUpon Submit "Why It Is Offensive to Read the Constitution" to Reddit Submit "Why It Is Offensive to Read the Constitution" to Digg Submit "Why It Is Offensive to Read the Constitution" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. Anonymous's Avatar
    Whoa! Looks like someone's buttons have been pushed!

    Refer to an old television show that most people under 30 have never seen beyond just flicking through some channels and then claim that the Republicans are up to a nefarious plot by reading the Constitution aloud suggests that the author is really upset. We get an idea of this based upon the notion of the "living document". Namely, a judge can just say the document means whatever he likes to say it means rather than what it actually says. For example, freedom of speech really means that in the modern era, people can have the freedom to say whatever the government says is allowed to be said. There! That's how the "living document" theory works! And "the right of the people to bear arms" really means... the government which apparently needed this "right" spelled out in order for their standing army to work.

    OK....

    Perhaps the "real American" slur from the right resonates with the public so well because... they have a point. The left typically worships Europe and continually bashes the states as being behind the rest of the world in adopting socialism and this pesky Constitution gets in their way. If the Constitution really meant that the works of Karl Marx mean the same thing, then that would solve the problem nicely.

    Jason, you reveal your real sentiments when you write: "We as a nation are what we are because of and in spite of the Constitution." Indeed, this implies that you think the Constitution is something to be swept under the rug when it suits you and then brought out to justify your own agenda. Then you accuse the republicans of abusing it.

    I'm reminded of anti GW Bushers who hate the fact that he uses government power to "steal" their tax dollars to go to an "illegal" war. Then they preach that the government should have unlimited power since government is so good. Isn't it awful when there are "evil" people out there who rob from you while you're out to take from others for "good" ends?

    Thanks for showing that the Republicans really made an impact in what they did. Looks like more democratic congressional seats will be lost in 2 years! Especially by Jim Webb in Virginia!


Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: