Non Living Research Paper

Abstract
In this paper research will be done on the United State Constitution. Seeing if the Constitution is a living or non-living document. Also if the United States Constitution still is a document that the people can live up to with today’s issues, or should the document be rewritten. Knowing that the Constitution is over two hundred years old. Some people feel it might not live up to the today standards and that something should be done. By using the research from the textbook, journal articles, newspapers, and internet sources to make the argument. Also using my own knowledge to help out with the research. In this paper there will be two sides to the argument. One being that the document is still living and lives up to the standards

This is one of the biggest questions wanting to be answered. In the article it states that “a living Constitution is one that evolves, changes over time, and adapts to new circumstances, without being formally amended”( Strauss, David A.). Meaning that yes, the Constitution in some ways still considered living. Also with the world changing so much you can’t expect the Constitution will change every time. Changing it every time something in the world comes about will get to a point where it’s too much for the government. “A common law Constitution is a "living" Constitution, but it is also one that can protect fundamental principles against transient public opinion, and it is not one that judges (or anyone else) can simply manipulate to fit their own ideas”( Strauss, David A). With today’s society and the way things are its hard to say whether or not this document is living or not. I still believe the Constitution is a non-living document. In another article I read, Scalia states that “that issues such as abortion and homosexuality do not appear in the Constitution makes them matters for which citizens and states can enact laws”( Patel, Ushma). Basically what he’s saying is that issues that are not supported in the Constitution make it not a living document. If the Constitution has to be modified in order to make everyone happy then that’s not living. We are supposed to go by the principles in the

In the research that I found it shows both sides to the argument. You have some people that will argue for the Constitution as being living, because it can change. Then you have others like me that argue the Constitution is a non-living, dead document. In order for the document to be a living document to me, we should have to go by the principles that are already there. Making new laws and rules that we can go be to be put in the Constitution does not mean it living. The Constitution was made so that we would already have fundamental principles put in place so the state and the citizens can obey