For a majority of Americans the U.S. Constitution (w/ the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence) is viewed almost as a holy document. These pieces of wood pulp decorated with some borderline poetic text have been elevated to a level which prevents us from drastically changing them for fear of being accused of being blasphemous. While I don't question the true value of these documents, I do question our reasons for keeping them in place. Do we revere these documents because they came fromsuch great men, or is it because we fear what mighthappen to our society in the event that we do drastically change them. Must the ideals be writtendown to be validated or do they exist regardless ofwhere, how, and if they are displayed. If, as stated,we hold these truths to be self-evident, then why must they be put on paper? Shouldnt those truths have been the foundation upon which a successful constitution was drafted rather than an after-thought?If our creator (or whom-ever) endowed us with certain inalienable rights, then shouldnt those rights been the primary concern during the constitutional conventions. The fact is that the U.S. Constitution came first while our inalienable rights were pulling up the rear. The primary concern of our Founding Fathers was the good of the nation as a whole, not each of us as individuals. Our world has changed in somany ways that one should question if our Founding Fathers could even recognize the U.S. in the year 2000. With the break-neck pace of the informational age (revolution...?) shouldnt we begin to reclaim ourrights and ultimately our power from the national government rather than submit any further? In a worldwhere the Internet appears to be the way of the futurewhy do we still insist that the government is best left up to the few chosen officials. Granted we play a part in our government via watch-dogs (press & whistle-blowers) and elections, but couldnt we more effectivelygovern ...
