Back in the early days of independant America there had been an ethical dilemma on whether or not they should ratify The U.S constitution. The main two arguments were whether citizens chose to maintain the status quo, or switch to a more centralized government. The two debates were backed up by James madison who wrote the Federalist No.10 for ratification and Patrick Henry who gave a speech against it. In the document James warns about how “there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party, or an obnoxious individual.” referring to someone or a group of people who could possibly create unique factions between on another and disrupt a potential republic.
1. Personally, I believe the constitution was the better document because it had more power. The articles of confederation gave the states more power than congress had, and because of this states either did was it said or did not. Because of the states having more power over Congress, the states did not focus on the needs of the whole country but only cared for their own state and what is best for their people. The constitution is better because it was easier to make changes and amendments to it.
Before ratifying the Constitution, a constitutional convention was called in 1787 to change the Articles of Confederation. This meant that each state had only one vote in Congress, and the size didn’t matter. The debate was between the federalists and Anti-Federalist, one side wanted to ratify the constitution and the other side didn’t. It was not easy because there were documents and articles both supporting and going against it. Who are the federalists?
Article Five of the United States Constitution clearly spells out ways to amend the document as so desired by Congress or the States. Regarding this specific topic, there have been recent debates over whether there should be a Constitutional Convention comprised of state legislatures developed for the sole purpose of bypassing congress in amending the Constitution. Before I watched the debate, I decided against this notion as I personally do not have any knowledge, presently, of how to amend the constitution. Therefore, there should not be a convention to do just that. Although the opposing side brought some real issues to light regarding the ideas of “Draining the Swamp”, using “True Democracy” for one person equals one vote/one state equals one vote, and stating that re-electing new congressional officials hasn’t changed anything either.
The young nation, barely three years old, was dying. Ten years after the Declaration of Independence, America was struggling to hold itself together. The Articles of Confederation, designed during the Revolution, demolished even the inkling of monarchy by forcing the national government to abide by the whim of the states. During the Revolutionary War the states held together out of necessity, but after the war, the states became hostile to their neighbors. It quickly became evident that a serious crisis has settled upon the United States.
The United States Constitution has created much debate since the moment it was conscripted. It has been argued that Constitution of the United States is a document that was drafted in response to the evolution of society. Others have argued that the creation of the Constitution was made as an effort to create a strong national government that was capable of exercising real authority and preservation of ideals in the revolution. The American Constitution is seen as being reactionary because the founders of the Constitution wanted to react to change in restoration of the previous state. The U.S. Constitution is considered reactionary because one should consider the events, documents, and people who participated in the era of the Constitution.
The mandatory draft. An infamous rule that, during times of war, all men of a country within a certain age range must sign up for the military, without any choice in the matter. Many believe that, in the U.S.A., where everyone is free, that mandatory draft does not apply. It seems logical. In a land where one is free to make their own choices, not the government, it would make sense that mandatory draft does not exist.
Rough Draft: Military Conscription in the United States Throughout the history of the United States, military drafts have failed to produce their desired effect. Mandatory military service inherently causes an increased military presence, especially within a country containing extensive involvement with foreign affairs. Controversy has historically surrounded military drafts in the United States as often, the wealthy have been successful in avoiding service. Because the issues surrounding a military draft outweigh the pros, the concept of military conscription has become unpopular and the United State 's military has proven itself effective with the current system based on voluntary service. Therefore, the United States should not adopt military conscription because not only would it provoke an increased number of military conflicts and inequality, but also would be unpopular and unnecessary.
The United States is a highly legalized country. The concept of the Constitution was deeply rooted into the country's life. It can be said that the origin of the United States Constitution is the gun dispute as the core. According to the Second Amendments of the US Constitution, people have the right to keep and possess arms. The purpose is to ensure that the state power is not violated, and it is a restriction for Federation.
The new constitution couldn’t please everyone. Some people liked it but some didn't. The two sides were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists were in favor of ratifying the Constitution, whereas the Anti-Federalists were opposed to it. They would have debates about ratifying the Constitution.
I feel that the US Constitution is somewhat outdated, and is in need of a revision. As everybody knows, the world has changed a lot in the past 250 years. These changes are things like transportation, total number of people in the world, and major things like the internet and technology. The events and problems that the Constitution solved years ago are a lot different than the problems that we face today. However, some of the more universal and basic rules of the constitution should not be subject to change because they still apply to today.
First off, the United States should get rid of the Draft because it would divide the Society. The United States has a very ugly history with the draft. There has been many draft dodgers, protests, and Anti War and Anti Draft demonstrations most commonly in the Vietnam War era. The protests over the draft got violent during the American Revolution. One example, that the draft would divide the society is To Protester’s
David Waldstreicher, an American historian, has claimed that the American Constitution is a ‘”pro-slavery’” document in his article published in 2015. In Waldstreicher's article and Sean Wilentz article also published in 2015 they both state that the Constitution refused to mention slavery as property and according to Abraham Lincoln in Wilentz’s article “Lincoln asserted that the framers had operated ‘on purpose to exclude from the Constitution the idea that there could be property in man’”. The American Constitution is a pro-slavery document that even though not wholly stating components within it that would entirely abolish slavery, but it also would not say that humans cannot be determined property. The U.S. Constitution is a pro-slavery
I believe the constitution created a just government, threes pieces of reasons for my claim are Impeachment, Congress has power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, Ability to amend the constitution. To begin, the Senate has the sole power of impeachment to remove the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the united states for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors (Article 2, Section 4). The importance of impeachment is to remove the corrupt and wrong doers from positions of power. With this you can make sure that no one is above the law, no matter the position you hold.
Cool Guys Walk away from Explosions! In the short story “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” many people leave the city of Omelas never coming back. These people Leave Omelas for the sake of one suffering child who can't be helped. I would do the same as these humble people and I would leave this terrible city so that my suffering isn't being contained within this young child.
