If my "ideology" is common sense, then yes, that's it.

You know as well as I that common sense has become a rarity.

For many reasons. But that's another discussion really.

That this has obviously affected a number of judges in todays system is clear.

What can be done about it ? I don't know. The common citizen has no power to change anything.

Happy (for now) sheep, we obey our "anointed leaders".

Define common sense. I didn't know that was an objective idea and I didn't know that the constitution defines what is or isn't constitutional by it being "common sense".

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

And you underscore the fact that common sense has become a rarity.

Define common sense ?

Exactly IT.

There's no such THING anymore IS there ?

Everyone has their own idea what it IS. Therefore it ISN'T.

Define good.

Define bad.

Define right.

Define wrong.

Define evil.

No such THINGS are there ?

Nope.

So you have no answer as to how to change the constitution in order to fit you idea of "common sense" I take it.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Great....I'm at work and now have two things on my mind.

Thanks a lot.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

Many times I believe Americans will have to take back the country and start a new government.

The constitution doesn't necessarily need changed. The people interpreting the meaning of it need changed.

Since the people interpreting the meaning of it are obviously confused about the meanings of good, bad, right and wrong.

They've all become "relative" and "equal" and open to the interpretation of everyman/woman. Therefore meaningless.

I think(hope) the PEOPLE will lead themselves back to common sense.

Fantastic. We can deport him/her than they can wade back across during the night to break another law.

Constitutional interpretation is, and always has been, subjective. When people disagree with decisions, they label it "judicial activism." When they agree with the decision, they label it "an accurate interpretation of the Constitution."

Even the term "judicial activism" is subjective. There is no precise, agreed-upon definition.

Judicial activism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Most judicial decisions fall into one of these three categories. I, personally, disagree with a ton of Supreme Court decisions, but I wouldn't go so far as to label them "judicial activism." I just have a different interpretation of certain Constitutional texts.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

So where does that leave us ? If nobody agrees on anything and has their own definitions of everything, of what value is ANY structure to keep a country functional ? To keep a society civil ?

Everything is "subjective." No one is wrong. No one is right.

It's my understanding that any power not granted to the national government in the constitution was left to the discretion of individual states.

So you hold the key to objective truth? Do enlighten us all.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

How did you get from what I said:

----------------------------
Originally Posted by Captain Trips
The constitution doesn't necessarily need changed. The people interpreting the meaning of it need changed.

Since the people interpreting the meaning of it are obviously confused about the meanings of good, bad, right and wrong.

They've all become "relative" and "equal" and open to the interpretation of everyman/woman. Therefore meaningless.

I think(hope) the PEOPLE will lead themselves back to common sense.
---------------------------

to mean I was suggesting that I held the key to objective truth ?

I'm only pointing out that since the meanings of good, bad, right and wrong have all become "relative" and "equal" and open to the interpretation of everyman/woman.

They're now largely meaningless.

Any healthy and functioning society needs to agree on at least a FEW items here or they will cease to BE a healthy and functioning society. They become a society at war with itself.

Is that not what we're seeing at least the beginnning stages of ?

No point in starting a kind of "blame game" here. ALL are at fault.

You are critical of the idea that what is constitutional according to judges is subjective and that it should be based on "common sense" which implies that their is a objective "common sense" that all judges should be held by. What is that objective "common sense" you imply? And what should be done to make sure judges are held by this standard you have yet to share with us?

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Had I the answer(s) I would give them.

History just seems to be repeating itself as if we've learned nothing from our past.

Maybe it's just part of the "tragedy of the human condition", I don't know.

If you do not have the answer then you have no objective truth to compare what you label as judicial activism against.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"