Monday, April 18, 2005
Rewrite the Constitution
Jeff Soyer visits in detail a topic I have touched upon in the past myself: How the Constitution could be better written.
He’s going amendment by amendment, starting with the first and moving on to the second.
There are rules. You’re free to add a slant or make it a funny version, or to be serious and try to add detail or clarity. You should cover the same item(s) within the rewrite. You’re limited to no more than 75 words and two sentences.
And just because it never hurts to have a reminder, here is the original text of the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
And here is the original text of the Second Amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Now go see Jeff and give him your rewrite of the First Amendment and Second Amendment.
Oh right. I suppose I ought to do my own. It’s harder than it sounds. I’ve thought about the topic in general for many years, dating back to a rough idea for a series of science fiction novels I had in the early to mid-eighties. Part of my thinking was to show how our Constitution ultimately failed to protect us in the end, show another flawed Constitution written for a colony and how it didn’t work out so well, and finally another colony based on the lessons learned from those. That only as a side element of the story, not as the focus, perhaps with the actual text of the documents as appendices.
As I said in Jeff’s comments, one possibility would be to include a glossary to try to ensure the intended definitions of the words used would be clear in the future. That aside from being as clear as possible in the first place. The Second Amendment sounds intentionally obfuscated, even if it was on account of the people at the time adding a reason clause that meant “and we mean it!”
Okay, First Amendment:
No law shall make any religion official or prohibited, or bar public exercise of cultural trappings associated at times with religions. No law shall restrict speech, unwritten expression, press, or peacable assembly in any form, existing or devised in the future, individual or commercial, nor the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
That’s 56 words, I think. Probably not ideal, but I was trying to follow the rules.
Now the Second Amendment:
The government exists primarily for the defense of its citizens, but the people retain the primary right and responsibility of self-defense, so no law shall be made to limit or regulate ownership of guns and other weapons by individuals and groups.
Not sure I like how that came out, but it’s a start. Care to try your hand at it?