History constitution

Question

1. Sometimes the US Constitution is referred to as a "Living Document." The idea that the founders intentionally made parts of the Const. vague so that the document could be reinterpreted to meet our needs for the future. What does Justice Stevens think? Do you think this is the case or should we strictly follow the Const. as written?

Answer 1

I find that Coolidge states the starting point for this question. You either agree or not, no middle ground

If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress.