CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION PAPER
At the heart of this argument, the issue is weather or not the founding fathers were thinking of themselves, or of others when the constitution was written. That is basically what it comes down to when the problem is watered down. John Roche, the one who believes that the founding fathers were incredible democratic reformers says yes, whiles Alfred Young says now and believes that the founding fathers were nothing more than a group of elite merchants, lawyers, and slave holders that were forced into creating a fair document that could be used by all. I personally believe that both of them make good points but I believe that I am inclined to lean to John Roche's side. For if the founding fathers were forced into creating something fair that they personally could prosper for, then they would not have had to go to such great extents to create the constitution.
Not only that, they were committed to working for and within a democratic framework. Roche on several parts, including that the founding fathers were the most superb reformers of their time. They had the resources and the money and the information needed to aid the british in the war. But even though representation and equality for African Americans did not come around in the U. If you look at any bit of the time during and before the war, when the British were passing all of those impossibly unfair laws against the colonists to extort them, you will see nearly all of the names that signed the constitution, and the Declaration of Independence, stand out constantly. For if these men were not committed to working for the people, they would not have stood out like they did during the revolutionary war. But let us face it, would you want dumb common farmers writing a constitution that would be shaping a nation? These men were rich, yes, but they were also selfless. They would have been valuable assets to the cause, and if they were selfish men, like Mr. It would have been as simple as that. Were they just looking to profit for themselves, they mainly would have sided with the loyalists during the war and tried to help the British win. My final point is this, Had the founding fathers not been devoted to the people as a whole, why was the constitution revised at all? Why didn't they just leave it with the Articles of Confederation an save themselves a couple hundred hours of yelling and disagreeing with each other about how the government should be set up and the different houses and the powers of the branches and they electorate college? Why not leave it with a government that had no power, no way to get money, and basically no backbone? I find it quite amusing that selfish men would do such a thing as to think about the public in such a manner. until hundreds of years later, that does not change the fact that the Founding fathers were thinking about the future when the constitution was written. Young believes, they would have done so.
Common topics in this essay:
Declaration Independence,
John Roche,
Articles Confederation,
,
John Roche's,
African Americans,
founding fathers,
founding fathers thinking,
founding fathers elite,
believes founding fathers,
forced creating fair,
forced creating,
believes founding,
john roche,
creating fair,
constitution written,
fathers thinking,
fathers elite,
|
Acceptance Essays
