美国宪法应该改革吗?（三）
正文翻译
Should the US Constitution be reformed?
美国宪法应该改革吗?
美国宪法应该改革吗?
评论翻译
Alicia Czechowski
Why do you think the U.S. Constitution can or cannot be revised entirely?
Revision of the U.S. Constitution is already in sight, The Koch brothers are underwriting austerity groups moving to rewrite the Constitution. Twenty-nine states have already passed resolutions to convene a convention. Seven more states targeted by austerity advocates will bring the number for ratification up to the required 38 states.
The legislative push may nominally be for the purpose of a balanced budget amendment and limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, but once the convention is underway, it can make up its own rules.
Texas governor Greg Abbott has called the Convention of States resolution an “emergency issue” and has published a 70 page plan aimed at severely limiting federal power, even allowing a two-thirds majority of states to override a Supreme Court ruling or federal law.
If it happens, it will be a runaway convention. Common Cause, the Center for Media and Democracy and other groups have raised the alarm about the efforts to call an open constitutional convention.
In 8 years the USA may not even make the pretense of being a democracy.
为什么你认为美国宪法可以或者不能完全修改？
美国宪法的修改已经近在眼前，科赫兄弟正在资助紧缩政策组织重写宪法。29个州已经通过召开会议的决议。又有七个州成为紧缩政策倡导者的目标，如此将使批准该法案的州的数量达到所需的38个。
名义上，推动立法可能是为了平衡预算修正案，限制联邦政府的权力和管辖权，但一旦会议开始，它就可以制定自己的规则。
得克萨斯州州长格雷格·阿博特称州大会决议是“紧急问题”，并发布了一份70页的计划，旨在严格限制联邦权力，甚至允许三分之二的州推翻最高法院的裁决或联邦法律。
如果真的发生了，那将是一场失控的大会。共同事业、媒体与民主中心和其他组织对努力呼吁召开公开制宪会议一事发出了警告。
8年后，美国甚至可能不会假装是一个民主国家。
Why do you think the U.S. Constitution can or cannot be revised entirely?
Revision of the U.S. Constitution is already in sight, The Koch brothers are underwriting austerity groups moving to rewrite the Constitution. Twenty-nine states have already passed resolutions to convene a convention. Seven more states targeted by austerity advocates will bring the number for ratification up to the required 38 states.
The legislative push may nominally be for the purpose of a balanced budget amendment and limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, but once the convention is underway, it can make up its own rules.
Texas governor Greg Abbott has called the Convention of States resolution an “emergency issue” and has published a 70 page plan aimed at severely limiting federal power, even allowing a two-thirds majority of states to override a Supreme Court ruling or federal law.
If it happens, it will be a runaway convention. Common Cause, the Center for Media and Democracy and other groups have raised the alarm about the efforts to call an open constitutional convention.
In 8 years the USA may not even make the pretense of being a democracy.
为什么你认为美国宪法可以或者不能完全修改？
美国宪法的修改已经近在眼前，科赫兄弟正在资助紧缩政策组织重写宪法。29个州已经通过召开会议的决议。又有七个州成为紧缩政策倡导者的目标，如此将使批准该法案的州的数量达到所需的38个。
名义上，推动立法可能是为了平衡预算修正案，限制联邦政府的权力和管辖权，但一旦会议开始，它就可以制定自己的规则。
得克萨斯州州长格雷格·阿博特称州大会决议是“紧急问题”，并发布了一份70页的计划，旨在严格限制联邦权力，甚至允许三分之二的州推翻最高法院的裁决或联邦法律。
如果真的发生了，那将是一场失控的大会。共同事业、媒体与民主中心和其他组织对努力呼吁召开公开制宪会议一事发出了警告。
8年后，美国甚至可能不会假装是一个民主国家。
Joseph Spina
What are the reasons why the U.S. Constitution has not been done away with in favor of a more modern constitution?
There are a variety of reasons:
There is no legal mechanism to do so. You can amend the constitution, but not outright replace it.
If the federal government were abolished, full sovereignty returns to the states. Given the wildly divergent social and legal desires of the different states, I strongly doubt they would agree to join another unx.
You say ‘modern’ as though there were a clear meaning as to what that constitutes. There is not. What one person calls progress, another person calls regression. What one person calls improvement, another calls draconian. And given that people want to replace the constitution because it doesn’t let one portion of the population impose its interpretation on another, it’s hard to imagine the states agreeing to either being coerced harder, or to let others get away with more.
STOP FIxiNG THINGS THAT AREN’T BROKEN. Really, that’s how you wind up with things that really are broken. The Constitution was written wisely, and with a lot of thought. It has stood the test of time. It doesn’t need replacement - it needs to be observed.
There is nothing out dated about the constitution. Government isn’t software that needs an upxe every 6 months to function properly.
为什么美国宪法没有被废除，取而代之的是一部更现代的宪法?
原因有很多:
没有这样做的法律机制。你可以修改宪法，但不能完全取代它。
如果联邦政府被废除，完全的主权将回到各州。考虑到不同州在社会和法律方面的巨大差异，我强烈怀疑它们是否会同意加入另一个联盟。
你说“现代”，这就好像它的构成有一个明确的含义似的，实际上是没有的。一个人称之为进步，另一个人则称之为倒退。一个人称之为改进，另一个人则称之为苛刻。鉴于人们想要替换宪法，因为它不会让一部分人把自己的解释强加给另一部分人，很难想象各州会同意要么受到更严厉的胁迫，要么让其他州逃脱更多的惩罚。
停止修理那些没有坏掉的东西。真的，这就是为什么你会得到真正坏掉的东西的原因。制定宪法时很明智，且经过了深思熟虑，它经受住了时间的考验，它不需要更换，它需要被观察。
宪法没有过时的地方，政府不是需要每6个月更新一次才能正常工作的软件。
What are the reasons why the U.S. Constitution has not been done away with in favor of a more modern constitution?
There are a variety of reasons:
There is no legal mechanism to do so. You can amend the constitution, but not outright replace it.
If the federal government were abolished, full sovereignty returns to the states. Given the wildly divergent social and legal desires of the different states, I strongly doubt they would agree to join another unx.
You say ‘modern’ as though there were a clear meaning as to what that constitutes. There is not. What one person calls progress, another person calls regression. What one person calls improvement, another calls draconian. And given that people want to replace the constitution because it doesn’t let one portion of the population impose its interpretation on another, it’s hard to imagine the states agreeing to either being coerced harder, or to let others get away with more.
STOP FIxiNG THINGS THAT AREN’T BROKEN. Really, that’s how you wind up with things that really are broken. The Constitution was written wisely, and with a lot of thought. It has stood the test of time. It doesn’t need replacement - it needs to be observed.
There is nothing out dated about the constitution. Government isn’t software that needs an upxe every 6 months to function properly.
为什么美国宪法没有被废除，取而代之的是一部更现代的宪法?
原因有很多:
没有这样做的法律机制。你可以修改宪法，但不能完全取代它。
如果联邦政府被废除，完全的主权将回到各州。考虑到不同州在社会和法律方面的巨大差异，我强烈怀疑它们是否会同意加入另一个联盟。
你说“现代”，这就好像它的构成有一个明确的含义似的，实际上是没有的。一个人称之为进步，另一个人则称之为倒退。一个人称之为改进，另一个人则称之为苛刻。鉴于人们想要替换宪法，因为它不会让一部分人把自己的解释强加给另一部分人，很难想象各州会同意要么受到更严厉的胁迫，要么让其他州逃脱更多的惩罚。
停止修理那些没有坏掉的东西。真的，这就是为什么你会得到真正坏掉的东西的原因。制定宪法时很明智，且经过了深思熟虑，它经受住了时间的考验，它不需要更换，它需要被观察。
宪法没有过时的地方，政府不是需要每6个月更新一次才能正常工作的软件。
Mark Binfield
What sucks about the US Constitution?
Instead of my own opinion, I'll relay the comment I heard Justice Scalia offer in a radio interview, in response to a similar question.
He suggested that the Constitution's provisions for amendment are outdated, because they make it far too hard to upxe the Constitution. They made sense when the Constitution was first drafted and there were far fewer states. But Scalia calculated that today, given the number of states, the large size disparity between them, and the 3/4 threshold for state ratification, opposition from as little as 2% of the US population could be enough to block an amendment. Scalia believes, and for what it's worth I would agree with him, that the frxrs of the Constitution never intended for it to become quite that inflexible a document.
美国宪法有什么不好的地方？
在此，我将转达斯卡利亚大法官在一次电台采访中回答类似问题时的言论作为评论，而不是讲出我自己的观点。
他表示，《宪法》的修正条款已经过时，因为它们使更新《宪法》变得太难了。当宪法刚起草时，它们是有道理的，而且州的数量要少得多。但斯卡利亚计算出，今天，考虑到各州的数量、各州之间的巨大规模差异，以及要达到3/4的州数量批准的门槛，哪怕只有2%的美国人反对，也足以阻止一项修正案被通过。值得一提的是，我同意他的观点，斯卡利亚认为，宪法的制定者从未打算让它成为一份如此不灵活的文件。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
What sucks about the US Constitution?
Instead of my own opinion, I'll relay the comment I heard Justice Scalia offer in a radio interview, in response to a similar question.
He suggested that the Constitution's provisions for amendment are outdated, because they make it far too hard to upxe the Constitution. They made sense when the Constitution was first drafted and there were far fewer states. But Scalia calculated that today, given the number of states, the large size disparity between them, and the 3/4 threshold for state ratification, opposition from as little as 2% of the US population could be enough to block an amendment. Scalia believes, and for what it's worth I would agree with him, that the frxrs of the Constitution never intended for it to become quite that inflexible a document.
美国宪法有什么不好的地方？
在此，我将转达斯卡利亚大法官在一次电台采访中回答类似问题时的言论作为评论，而不是讲出我自己的观点。
他表示，《宪法》的修正条款已经过时，因为它们使更新《宪法》变得太难了。当宪法刚起草时，它们是有道理的，而且州的数量要少得多。但斯卡利亚计算出，今天，考虑到各州的数量、各州之间的巨大规模差异，以及要达到3/4的州数量批准的门槛，哪怕只有2%的美国人反对，也足以阻止一项修正案被通过。值得一提的是，我同意他的观点，斯卡利亚认为，宪法的制定者从未打算让它成为一份如此不灵活的文件。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Stephen L
Can the Constitution of The United States of American be rewritten?
Of course. It was created by humans, so it certainly can be altered by humans.
It has been altered 26 times, through the amendment process articulated in the document itself, although technically the first ten amendments came out together and are known collectively as the Bill of Rights.
It may also be “rewritten” through the calling of a constitutional convention, which may be initiated by the states themselves. However, a constitutional convention might net end in a rewrite, but in a complete scrapping of the entire document, or any number of scenarios in between.
After all, that’s how the Constitution itself came into being — through a convention called to address the flaws in the Articles of Confederation.
美利坚合众国的宪法可以改写吗？
当然，它是由人类创造的，所以它肯定可以被人类修改。
通过文件本身所阐述的修正过程，它已经被修改了26次，尽管从理论上讲，前十次修正是一起提出的，统称为《权利法案》。
它也可能通过制宪会议的呼吁被“修正”，制宪会议可能由各州自己发起。然而，制宪会议最终可能会以重写而告终，但可能会彻底废除整个文件，或者介于两者之间的任何情况。
毕竟，这就是宪法本身是如何形成的——通过一次会议来解决《邦联条例》中的缺陷。
Can the Constitution of The United States of American be rewritten?
Of course. It was created by humans, so it certainly can be altered by humans.
It has been altered 26 times, through the amendment process articulated in the document itself, although technically the first ten amendments came out together and are known collectively as the Bill of Rights.
It may also be “rewritten” through the calling of a constitutional convention, which may be initiated by the states themselves. However, a constitutional convention might net end in a rewrite, but in a complete scrapping of the entire document, or any number of scenarios in between.
After all, that’s how the Constitution itself came into being — through a convention called to address the flaws in the Articles of Confederation.
美利坚合众国的宪法可以改写吗？
当然，它是由人类创造的，所以它肯定可以被人类修改。
通过文件本身所阐述的修正过程，它已经被修改了26次，尽管从理论上讲，前十次修正是一起提出的，统称为《权利法案》。
它也可能通过制宪会议的呼吁被“修正”，制宪会议可能由各州自己发起。然而，制宪会议最终可能会以重写而告终，但可能会彻底废除整个文件，或者介于两者之间的任何情况。
毕竟，这就是宪法本身是如何形成的——通过一次会议来解决《邦联条例》中的缺陷。
Rick Ferrara
Does the United States need a new constitution?
No, the Constitution establishes The frxwork for our Nation. It is one of the most important documents in the history of the planet.
Do we really need to revise the First Amendment? Which part of free speech do we need to take away from people?
Some people really want to do away with the Second Amendment, which states that the People have the right to bear arms - however, they do not and never will represent the majority of Americans, despite what the manipulated polling attempts to tell us. If enough people want to amend this provision, the constitution has a process by which that can occur, but it is (as it should be) complex. The Constitution should not be easily modified, too much is at stake.
Third Amendment: American’s should not have to quarter soldiers in their homes. Really? What part of this do you want to change?
4th Amendment: Protection against illegal search and seizure. Again, why change this, the concept is simple and we have 250 years of case law to expand it to modern times.
5th Amendment : Protection against self-incrimination, double jeopardy. Protection of due process and right to a grand jury. Same thing… 250 years of case law has modernized this one… just like all the rest…
美国需要新宪法吗？
不，宪法确立了我们国家的框架，它是地球历史上最重要的文献之一。
我们真的需要修改第一修正案吗？我们需要剥夺人们言论自由的哪一部分？
有些人真的想废除第二修正案，该修正案规定人民有权携带武器-然而，尽管被操纵的民意调查试图告诉我们些什么，他们现在不能也永远不能代表大多数美国人。如果有足够多的人想要修改这一条款，宪法有一个可以实现的程序，但它是(应该是)复杂的。宪法不应该被轻易修改，因为太危险了。
第三修正案：美国人不应该把士兵安置在家里。真的吗？你想改变其中的哪一部分？
第四修正案：防止非法搜查和扣押。同样，为什么要改变这一点，这个概念很简单，我们有250年的判例法将其扩展到现代。
第五修正案：防止自证其罪，双重危险。保护正当诉讼程序和大陪审团的权利。250年的判例法让这个案子现代化了，就像其他修正案一样。
Does the United States need a new constitution?
No, the Constitution establishes The frxwork for our Nation. It is one of the most important documents in the history of the planet.
Do we really need to revise the First Amendment? Which part of free speech do we need to take away from people?
Some people really want to do away with the Second Amendment, which states that the People have the right to bear arms - however, they do not and never will represent the majority of Americans, despite what the manipulated polling attempts to tell us. If enough people want to amend this provision, the constitution has a process by which that can occur, but it is (as it should be) complex. The Constitution should not be easily modified, too much is at stake.
Third Amendment: American’s should not have to quarter soldiers in their homes. Really? What part of this do you want to change?
4th Amendment: Protection against illegal search and seizure. Again, why change this, the concept is simple and we have 250 years of case law to expand it to modern times.
5th Amendment : Protection against self-incrimination, double jeopardy. Protection of due process and right to a grand jury. Same thing… 250 years of case law has modernized this one… just like all the rest…
美国需要新宪法吗？
不，宪法确立了我们国家的框架，它是地球历史上最重要的文献之一。
我们真的需要修改第一修正案吗？我们需要剥夺人们言论自由的哪一部分？
有些人真的想废除第二修正案，该修正案规定人民有权携带武器-然而，尽管被操纵的民意调查试图告诉我们些什么，他们现在不能也永远不能代表大多数美国人。如果有足够多的人想要修改这一条款，宪法有一个可以实现的程序，但它是(应该是)复杂的。宪法不应该被轻易修改，因为太危险了。
第三修正案：美国人不应该把士兵安置在家里。真的吗？你想改变其中的哪一部分？
第四修正案：防止非法搜查和扣押。同样，为什么要改变这一点，这个概念很简单，我们有250年的判例法将其扩展到现代。
第五修正案：防止自证其罪，双重危险。保护正当诉讼程序和大陪审团的权利。250年的判例法让这个案子现代化了，就像其他修正案一样。
6th Amendment : Right to speedy and public trial, impartial jury and right to counsel. There is a pattern here… no need to modify this…
We could go on and on… Protection from self-incrimination (5th A), Right to a speedy trial (6th A), Right to a trail by jury (7th A), No cruel and unusual punishment (8th), A prohibition that the rights in the Constitution will not be used against the People (9th A) and the 10th A: Reserved Powers to the States.
Amendments 11 through 27 did things like free the slaves and gave them citizenship, the right to vote (Black men), established Income Taxes, put prohibition into place and then later removed it, Gave Women the right to vote, limited the President to two terms and made the election of our Senators a direct election… and a few more things like gave 18-year-olds the right to vote.
What you don’t see here is the 1978 Equal Rights Amendment, which FAILED to get the required votes to be made part of the Constitution. In 2020, the idea that the required number of states could not or would not vote in the required number of years is hard to believe, but that is what happened. We will hopefully see that amendment passed one day.
So, out of all of these, the only Amendment that some people seem to have anxiety about is the 2nd Amendment. Few are going to argue about doing away with Double Jeopardy… or having to quarter soldiers in their homes - but some of these zealots would likely agree to throw the entire Constitution out to simply get rid of that pesky amendment. It really pisses them off that it’s #2 on the list… was pretty darn important to our Founders.
第六修正案：获得快速公开审判的权利、公正的陪审团和获得律师的权利。这里有一个模式，不需要修改。
我们可以继续……免于自证其罪的保护(第5条A)，迅速审判的权利(第6条A)，陪审团审判的权利(第7条A)，不得残酷和不寻常的惩罚(第8条)，禁止宪法中的权利不得用于反对人民(第9条A)和第10条A:各州保留的权力。
第11至27号修正案做了一些事情，比如解放奴隶，赋予他们公民身份，投票权（黑人男性），设立所得税，实施禁令，然后取消，赋予女性投票权，将总统任期限制在两届，并将参议员选举定为直接选举……还有一些事情，例如赋予18岁的人投票权。
你在这里看不到的是1978年的《平等权利修正案》，该修正案未能获得成为宪法一部分所需的选票。在2020年，在规定的年限内，有规定数量的州不能或不愿投票的想法很难让人相信，但事实就是如此。我们希望有一天能看到修正案获得通过。
因此，在所有这些修正案中，一些人似乎唯一担心的修正案是第二修正案。很少有人会反对废除双重危险审判……或者必须把士兵安置在家里——但这些狂热分子中的一些人可能会同意抛弃整个宪法，只是为了摆脱这个讨厌的修正案。这真的让他们很生气，它在名单上排名第二，对我们的创始人来说非常重要。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
We could go on and on… Protection from self-incrimination (5th A), Right to a speedy trial (6th A), Right to a trail by jury (7th A), No cruel and unusual punishment (8th), A prohibition that the rights in the Constitution will not be used against the People (9th A) and the 10th A: Reserved Powers to the States.
Amendments 11 through 27 did things like free the slaves and gave them citizenship, the right to vote (Black men), established Income Taxes, put prohibition into place and then later removed it, Gave Women the right to vote, limited the President to two terms and made the election of our Senators a direct election… and a few more things like gave 18-year-olds the right to vote.
What you don’t see here is the 1978 Equal Rights Amendment, which FAILED to get the required votes to be made part of the Constitution. In 2020, the idea that the required number of states could not or would not vote in the required number of years is hard to believe, but that is what happened. We will hopefully see that amendment passed one day.
So, out of all of these, the only Amendment that some people seem to have anxiety about is the 2nd Amendment. Few are going to argue about doing away with Double Jeopardy… or having to quarter soldiers in their homes - but some of these zealots would likely agree to throw the entire Constitution out to simply get rid of that pesky amendment. It really pisses them off that it’s #2 on the list… was pretty darn important to our Founders.
第六修正案：获得快速公开审判的权利、公正的陪审团和获得律师的权利。这里有一个模式，不需要修改。
我们可以继续……免于自证其罪的保护(第5条A)，迅速审判的权利(第6条A)，陪审团审判的权利(第7条A)，不得残酷和不寻常的惩罚(第8条)，禁止宪法中的权利不得用于反对人民(第9条A)和第10条A:各州保留的权力。
第11至27号修正案做了一些事情，比如解放奴隶，赋予他们公民身份，投票权（黑人男性），设立所得税，实施禁令，然后取消，赋予女性投票权，将总统任期限制在两届，并将参议员选举定为直接选举……还有一些事情，例如赋予18岁的人投票权。
你在这里看不到的是1978年的《平等权利修正案》，该修正案未能获得成为宪法一部分所需的选票。在2020年，在规定的年限内，有规定数量的州不能或不愿投票的想法很难让人相信，但事实就是如此。我们希望有一天能看到修正案获得通过。
因此，在所有这些修正案中，一些人似乎唯一担心的修正案是第二修正案。很少有人会反对废除双重危险审判……或者必须把士兵安置在家里——但这些狂热分子中的一些人可能会同意抛弃整个宪法，只是为了摆脱这个讨厌的修正案。这真的让他们很生气，它在名单上排名第二，对我们的创始人来说非常重要。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
William Connell Cawthon Jr.
Should any of the amendments to the US Constitution be changed? If so, which ones and why?
I would like to see the Second Amendment simplified to “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” This would remove confusion or willful misinterpretation.
I would like to see a new amendment redefining the limits of the federal government under the Commerce Clause. Ever since Wickard v. Fowler was decided in 1942, the federal government has been encroaching on reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment.
It sounds a bit frivolous, but I would like to see an amendment that modifies the requirements to be elected to Congress. I believe every person running for a national legislative office should be able to pass a test showing that they have a thorough understanding of the United States Constitution. If one wishes to be a part of shaping the nation’s laws, it’s reasonable to expect them to know the legal foundation for them.
美国宪法的任何修正案都应该修改吗?如果有，是哪些，为什么?
我希望将第二修正案简化为“人民持有和携带武器的权利不受侵犯”，这将消除混淆或故意的误解的情况。
我希望看到一项新的修正案，根据《商业条款》重新界定联邦政府的权限。自从1942年威卡德诉福勒案判决以来，联邦政府一直在侵犯宪法第十修正案对各州保留的权利。
这听起来有点不严肃，但我希望看到一项修正案，修改当选国会议员的要求。我认为，每一个竞选国家立法职位的人都应该能够通过一项测试，表明他们对美国宪法有着透彻的理解。如果一个人希望参与国家法律的制定，那么期望他们了解这些法律的法律基础是合理的。
Should any of the amendments to the US Constitution be changed? If so, which ones and why?
I would like to see the Second Amendment simplified to “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” This would remove confusion or willful misinterpretation.
I would like to see a new amendment redefining the limits of the federal government under the Commerce Clause. Ever since Wickard v. Fowler was decided in 1942, the federal government has been encroaching on reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment.
It sounds a bit frivolous, but I would like to see an amendment that modifies the requirements to be elected to Congress. I believe every person running for a national legislative office should be able to pass a test showing that they have a thorough understanding of the United States Constitution. If one wishes to be a part of shaping the nation’s laws, it’s reasonable to expect them to know the legal foundation for them.
美国宪法的任何修正案都应该修改吗?如果有，是哪些，为什么?
我希望将第二修正案简化为“人民持有和携带武器的权利不受侵犯”，这将消除混淆或故意的误解的情况。
我希望看到一项新的修正案，根据《商业条款》重新界定联邦政府的权限。自从1942年威卡德诉福勒案判决以来，联邦政府一直在侵犯宪法第十修正案对各州保留的权利。
这听起来有点不严肃，但我希望看到一项修正案，修改当选国会议员的要求。我认为，每一个竞选国家立法职位的人都应该能够通过一项测试，表明他们对美国宪法有着透彻的理解。如果一个人希望参与国家法律的制定，那么期望他们了解这些法律的法律基础是合理的。
William Redmond
Should we rewrite the US constitution?
It does not need to be rewritten, only slightly modified to rein in the Federal Government from sucking all power to itself. It has bloated itself into a monster that considers itself morally superior to the American citizenry, which, on the face of it, it a complete absurdity.
我们应该重写美国宪法吗？
它不需要重写，只需要稍微修改一下，就可以控制联邦政府将所有权力吸走，联邦政府已经膨胀成一个怪物了，认为自己在道德上优于美国公民，从表面上看，这完全是荒谬的。
Should we rewrite the US constitution?
It does not need to be rewritten, only slightly modified to rein in the Federal Government from sucking all power to itself. It has bloated itself into a monster that considers itself morally superior to the American citizenry, which, on the face of it, it a complete absurdity.
我们应该重写美国宪法吗？
它不需要重写，只需要稍微修改一下，就可以控制联邦政府将所有权力吸走，联邦政府已经膨胀成一个怪物了，认为自己在道德上优于美国公民，从表面上看，这完全是荒谬的。
Mark Lorenz
Should the US "modernize" the Constitution?
Thanks for the A2A
We need to be careful here. Nothing of course is ever perfect, so changes are needed at times…and they have been made. The process is purposely difficult and thank goodness for that. There have been and continue to be so many proposals that if it were easier we'd be living on legal shifting sands on a regular basis.
Add to that our current (2017) arguments about how our country should be run, many of them bad ideas like identity politics and race baiting, that we risk these bad ideas making it into the foundation of our country.
The original intent was that local and state ideas can be tried out and often only used where people want those changes without forcing them on all of us. That's why e.g. someone living in San Francisco won't be as comfortable living in Alabama. And that's ok. Changing the constitution is a big government one-size-fits-all type of move and should therefore be used sparingly.
Bottom line: we don't need to change the constitution much, nor should we want to.
美国应该让宪法“现代化”吗？
感谢邀请回答
我们得小心点。当然，没有什么是完美的，所以有时需要改变，而且已经做出了改变。这个修正过程被故意设置得很困难，谢天谢地。已经有并将继续有非常多的提议，如果更容易的话，我们将定期生活在合法的流沙（不断变化且难以预测的政治局势）上。
除此之外，我们目前（2017年）关于我们的国家应该如何管理的争论，其中许多是错误的想法，如身份政治和种族煽动，我们冒着这些错误想法成为我们国家基础的风险。
最初的意图是，地方和州的想法可以尝试，并且通常只在人们想要这些改变的地方使用，而不是强迫我们所有人接受它们。这就是为什么住在旧金山的人在阿拉巴马州生活会不那么舒服，这没关系。修改宪法是一个大政府一刀切的举措，因此应该谨慎使用。
一句话：我们不需要修改宪法，也不应该这么做。
Should the US "modernize" the Constitution?
Thanks for the A2A
We need to be careful here. Nothing of course is ever perfect, so changes are needed at times…and they have been made. The process is purposely difficult and thank goodness for that. There have been and continue to be so many proposals that if it were easier we'd be living on legal shifting sands on a regular basis.
Add to that our current (2017) arguments about how our country should be run, many of them bad ideas like identity politics and race baiting, that we risk these bad ideas making it into the foundation of our country.
The original intent was that local and state ideas can be tried out and often only used where people want those changes without forcing them on all of us. That's why e.g. someone living in San Francisco won't be as comfortable living in Alabama. And that's ok. Changing the constitution is a big government one-size-fits-all type of move and should therefore be used sparingly.
Bottom line: we don't need to change the constitution much, nor should we want to.
美国应该让宪法“现代化”吗？
感谢邀请回答
我们得小心点。当然，没有什么是完美的，所以有时需要改变，而且已经做出了改变。这个修正过程被故意设置得很困难，谢天谢地。已经有并将继续有非常多的提议，如果更容易的话，我们将定期生活在合法的流沙（不断变化且难以预测的政治局势）上。
除此之外，我们目前（2017年）关于我们的国家应该如何管理的争论，其中许多是错误的想法，如身份政治和种族煽动，我们冒着这些错误想法成为我们国家基础的风险。
最初的意图是，地方和州的想法可以尝试，并且通常只在人们想要这些改变的地方使用，而不是强迫我们所有人接受它们。这就是为什么住在旧金山的人在阿拉巴马州生活会不那么舒服，这没关系。修改宪法是一个大政府一刀切的举措，因此应该谨慎使用。
一句话：我们不需要修改宪法，也不应该这么做。
Tony Zanichkowsky
Could the US constitution theoretically be amended or overhauled to better address current times and circumstances?
Why don't you instead, embrace the Constitution as it is.
You realize, right, that the Constitution was deliberately designed to be very difficult to amend, because the Founders thought it fruitless and dangerous, to constantly alter the founding laws and structure of our country to adapt it to ever changing times and circumstances.
You're supposed to adapt yourself to the Constitution, not the other way around. Learn to embrace the genius of the men who designed this republic.
They were far better statesmen than any currently serving in public office.
从理论上讲，美国宪法是否可以进行修改或彻底改革，以更好地适应当前的时代和环境？
你为什么不接受现行的宪法呢?
你知道的，宪法是故意设计成很难修改的，因为开国元勋们认为不断修改我们国家的建国法律和结构以适应不断变化的时代和环境是徒劳和危险的。
你应该让自己适应宪法，而不是相反。
学会拥抱设计这个共和国的天才们吧。
他们是比任何一位现任公职人员都要好得多的政治家。
Could the US constitution theoretically be amended or overhauled to better address current times and circumstances?
Why don't you instead, embrace the Constitution as it is.
You realize, right, that the Constitution was deliberately designed to be very difficult to amend, because the Founders thought it fruitless and dangerous, to constantly alter the founding laws and structure of our country to adapt it to ever changing times and circumstances.
You're supposed to adapt yourself to the Constitution, not the other way around. Learn to embrace the genius of the men who designed this republic.
They were far better statesmen than any currently serving in public office.
从理论上讲，美国宪法是否可以进行修改或彻底改革，以更好地适应当前的时代和环境？
你为什么不接受现行的宪法呢?
你知道的，宪法是故意设计成很难修改的，因为开国元勋们认为不断修改我们国家的建国法律和结构以适应不断变化的时代和环境是徒劳和危险的。
你应该让自己适应宪法，而不是相反。
学会拥抱设计这个共和国的天才们吧。
他们是比任何一位现任公职人员都要好得多的政治家。
Chuck Sears
How many Constitutions of the United States are there?
Assuming that the question comes from a US citizen...questions like this make me say we need to go back to teaching Civics in high school. If people learned about the Constitution and how our government works, they would understand that there is only one Constitution of the USA and it is the supreme law of the land.
Questions like this also scare the hell out of me because people who are so ignorant of our government are also the ones voting on our government.
If you are not a US citizen, my apologies for the somewhat rough tone of the post. It really saddens me how many people in this country have no clue whatsoever how our government works.
美国有多少部宪法?
假设这个问题来自美国公民，这样的问题让我觉得我们需要回到高中教公民学。如果人们了解了宪法和我们的政府是如何运作的，他们就会明白美国只有一部宪法，它是美国的最高法律。
像这样的问题也把我吓坏了，因为那些对我们的政府如此无知的人也是对我们的政府投票的人
如果你不是美国公民，我为这篇文章有些粗鲁的语气道歉。这个国家有不少人完全不知道我们的政府是如何运作的，这让我很难过。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
How many Constitutions of the United States are there?
Assuming that the question comes from a US citizen...questions like this make me say we need to go back to teaching Civics in high school. If people learned about the Constitution and how our government works, they would understand that there is only one Constitution of the USA and it is the supreme law of the land.
Questions like this also scare the hell out of me because people who are so ignorant of our government are also the ones voting on our government.
If you are not a US citizen, my apologies for the somewhat rough tone of the post. It really saddens me how many people in this country have no clue whatsoever how our government works.
美国有多少部宪法?
假设这个问题来自美国公民，这样的问题让我觉得我们需要回到高中教公民学。如果人们了解了宪法和我们的政府是如何运作的，他们就会明白美国只有一部宪法，它是美国的最高法律。
像这样的问题也把我吓坏了，因为那些对我们的政府如此无知的人也是对我们的政府投票的人
如果你不是美国公民，我为这篇文章有些粗鲁的语气道歉。这个国家有不少人完全不知道我们的政府是如何运作的，这让我很难过。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Lynn Fredricks
Should we rewrite the US constitution?
No, the US Constitution is near perfect as it is. It also offers a grand template for avoiding many forms of tyranny.
Where it isn’t perfect, the Constitution can be extended and modified with amendments.
我们应该重写美国宪法吗？
不，美国宪法虽然近乎完美，但它也为避免多种形式的暴政提供了一个宏伟的模板。
至于不完善的地方，宪法可以通过修正案进行扩展和修改。
Should we rewrite the US constitution?
No, the US Constitution is near perfect as it is. It also offers a grand template for avoiding many forms of tyranny.
Where it isn’t perfect, the Constitution can be extended and modified with amendments.
我们应该重写美国宪法吗？
不，美国宪法虽然近乎完美，但它也为避免多种形式的暴政提供了一个宏伟的模板。
至于不完善的地方，宪法可以通过修正案进行扩展和修改。
Matt Riggsby
If some Americans want to alter the Constitution, how?
How, as in by what method? There’s a process for amending the Constitution built in, and we’ve used it over twenty times. There are a couple of ways it can happen, but it boils down to supermajority support.
How, as in in what way? There’s a range of things which various people would like changed. There are racists who would like to see an end to birthright citizenship, fiscal conservatives who want to require a balanced budget, and proponents of democracy who would like to see the Electoral College abolished and voting established as a fundamental right. There are, really, too many proposed amendments to even begin to list.
如果一些美国人想修改宪法，怎么做？
如何修改，如通过什么方法修改？有一个修改宪法的程序，我们已经使用了20多次。有几种方式可以实现，但归根结底的是绝大多数人支持现行宪法。
如何修改，以何种方式修改？不同的人希望改变的事情有很多。有些种族主义者希望终结与生俱来的公民权，有些财政保守派希望看到预算平衡，还有民主支持者希望看到选举团被废除，投票权被确立为一项基本权利。事实上，有太多的拟议修正案甚至无法列出。
If some Americans want to alter the Constitution, how?
How, as in by what method? There’s a process for amending the Constitution built in, and we’ve used it over twenty times. There are a couple of ways it can happen, but it boils down to supermajority support.
How, as in in what way? There’s a range of things which various people would like changed. There are racists who would like to see an end to birthright citizenship, fiscal conservatives who want to require a balanced budget, and proponents of democracy who would like to see the Electoral College abolished and voting established as a fundamental right. There are, really, too many proposed amendments to even begin to list.
如果一些美国人想修改宪法，怎么做？
如何修改，如通过什么方法修改？有一个修改宪法的程序，我们已经使用了20多次。有几种方式可以实现，但归根结底的是绝大多数人支持现行宪法。
如何修改，以何种方式修改？不同的人希望改变的事情有很多。有些种族主义者希望终结与生俱来的公民权，有些财政保守派希望看到预算平衡，还有民主支持者希望看到选举团被废除，投票权被确立为一项基本权利。事实上，有太多的拟议修正案甚至无法列出。
很赞 0
收藏