Originally Posted by
Monster Hunter
that's kind of my point, free speech is contentious issue in the USA so its not something widely agreed on, we don't have free speech we have a right to expression which is different but then there's a long list of caveats and amendments we mostly agree on, but we may not for ever always agree on them, I mean look at hoe much has changed in America since it wrote is constitution, 300 years is a hell of a long time, things change, views change sometimes on ways and in things we don't expect, I'm sure your founding fathers never imagined the rise of atheism, they talked a big game about freedom of religion and secularism, but then they littered god all over early America and now you guys have an issue with religion in politics.
and this is the thing, a constitution isn't the only way to make something like a right hard to remove, the Uk currently has no constitution and yet has rights and wrote many of the rights the EU and UN use today, so why hamstring your self in progress by making something that some of you're citizens might come to one day blindly follow with such fanaticism that it creates internal friction just on its own, that the blind following its self makes it a debate if there is even allowed to be a debate about such things.
i mean you guys have a right in there, that was first envisioned to prevent foreign imperial nations having power over your people that is now used to prevent America accepting the basic UN human rights in legislation, which then makes you look like mooks on the world stage when you go to talk about other nations records on rights (that and the whole Guantanamo bay thing).
but that's my argument, constitution's make nations too inflexible to an ever changing world and cause issues with stagnation at some point possibly centuries later when the world the constitution was written in is vastly different from the reality of the world at that time.