“In other words, the Constitution and it’s original intent and construction remains streadfast AS the world changes.

Perhaps UrbaneGorilla and others would understand why the majority of Americans rely on a 225+ year old document if they would merely study the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and all the Federalist Papers.”

If you did as I suggested you would find your questions answered already.

Oh and BTW, you had no trick question. Don't flatter yourself. It's unbecoming.

Although you didn't address contract law, isn't the Constitution a contract? In fact, is it not a unilateral contract of adhesion? I was not present during the signing of this contract, yet our society seems quite content to expect me to be a party to it in contradiction to contract law, which is the law of our land and yet I (and every other person in the US) is expected to honor abide by and accept it blindly.

Is this document supposed to last in perpetuity? If so, then what right did the Colonists have to cancel their contract with the King of England? Seems a bit flighty, not to mention hypocritical. I suspect the answer would be found in part of your quote :

“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government”

Does this not say in effect that the people have the right to alter their form of government? Why then does anyone feel the contract written 225 years ago has any more solidity than say a lease agreement on a flat in NYC?

Regarding your note “It is evident from Jefferson’s quote that he is speaking directly to UrbaneGorilla and the comment he made.” .. If I recall, the section of the Constitution that you quoted are not the words of Jefferson. (Again, if I recall), this paragraph was modified by Ben Franklin. However, It might be reasonable to presume that this was the intent of the founding fathers. Which brings me back to the issue of contracts involving persons that were not party to the writing.

I stand by my statement. The contract written in my name by people that do not live in my times and had no fortune telling abilities should be adjusted to suit the needs of the people of the United States of America as that need arises. And what is wrong with that in a Democracy? We are a Democracy aren't we? Trick question.. We're a Republic ;=)