Letter: Constitution needs literal interpretation

Tuesday, April 25, 2006 | 7:06 a.m.

What's wrong with America today? This is a question that I hear and read posed in many different fashions. While I have no qualified answer, I do have an opinion. We have gotten away from the very document that made America the absolute world leader up until the latter half of the 20th century, that document being the Constitution.

In my opinion we've moved away from what is written in the Constitution. That's because we have become fixated on the debate between there being a liberal or a conservative interpretation. No longer does anyone consider a literal interpretation.

The gentlemen assembled in Philadelphia in 1787 were well aware of how much change had occurred since 1620, when the pilgrims set foot on Plymouth Rock. As a result they knew what was required: a document that could adjust to the changing time of the future, a "living document" so to speak.

To produce such a document they allowed for their work to be amended. Even during the process of ratifying the Constitution they realized it was not sufficient, that it needed more. Three years after ratification they submitted 12 amendments to the states, of which 10 were ratified and became known as the Bill of Rights.

Today we scorn the concept of the Constitution being a "living document." And why such scorn? It's because today we ignore the amendment process and turn to interpreting the document to meet our needs. This totally ignores what the Framers wished for this drastically different form of governing.

We need to return to a literal interpretation of the Constitution. If the Fourth Amendment no longer secures us enough, as the Patriot Act suggests, we need to amend it, not just interpret it into oblivion.

Terry E Peele, Las Vegas