American Founding Fathers

[bighead384]

What are your ideas regarding people making the argument that some policies are "going against what the Founding Fathers wanted"? To what extent should we consider the views of the Founding Father's when debating politics today?

I've heard this argument a lot ever since Obama has been elected. To put it simply, I don't really care that much about what the Founding Father's would think about today's debates over policy. Is there really something wrong with that? It's not that I don't respect their ideas, I just can't respect that approach to thinking about what's wrong or right, effective or ineffective. It's kind of an easy way out to me.

[Alison]

I'm not really familiar with the Founding Fathers of the US, but gathering from what you've said and what I've heard, it sounds like what some poeple over here would say in reference to the people who died for Ireland's freedom.
To a certain extent it's ok...but things back then were different, and there has to be change at some point. As long as it's change for the better obviously.
When people say that, it seems like they are trying to grasp onto some part of the past, and look back on things through rose tinted glasses.

[DMelges]

My guess is the Founding Fathers expected all the generations to be peaceful and just, exactly the way they wanted it to be.

[dexter12296566]

Well I am learning about this kind of thing right now and if it goes against the constitution it won't be passed. The founding fathers do matter and will always be involved in the future of our country(Meant for the Americans!)!

[Alison]

You can't just say "It doesnt fit in what people however many years ago said, so we can't do it"
We live in a different time, and can't be directed by what people said in the past. Yes, as guidelines maybe, but things should be able to be flexible.

[wheelchairman]

People will bring up the founding fathers when they can. They did it all the time under Bush too. It doesn't matter what the founding fathers believed, both sides of the political spectrum will use their name to lend validity to their own opinions. This is especially true of Jefferson.

[dexter12296566]

You can't just say "It doesnt fit in what people however many years ago said, so we can't do it"
We live in a different time, and can't be directed by what people said in the past. Yes, as guidelines maybe, but things should be able to be flexible.

Maybe it should be changed but if it is unconstitutional the judicial court won't allow it!!!

[Jesus]

The same with some new policy being unconstitutional. Who cares, just because something is unconstitutional now, it doesn't mean it's automatically bad. You need actual arguments for that.
Otherwise it has way too much in common with Christianity, with the original constitution being the bible and the founding fathers as Gods.

[dexter12296566]

Well just because I say that is the way it is doesn't mean I totally agree with it!

[jacknife737]

This is one aspect of the American political culture that i've always found to be somewhat puzzling.

I mean every country has their own versions of them: Canada has the "Fathers of Confederation", but they almost never get brought up in public political discourses, unless its say relevant to the issue of national sovereignty (ie against Quebec separatists).

Context is everything: some people still believe that Washington's Farewell Address should be a blueprint for U.S. foreign policy, but that ignores the past couple hundred years of political/historical development and occurrences. Some things were written for a specific time and place, and should be treated as such.