The Problem With the Bill of Rights - Too Much Brains!

It seems that no matter what TV station you watch, what newspaper you read, or which blog you visit, you constantly come in to contact with debates over the meaning of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. Heck, the other day I heard a free speech discussion on ESPN, of all places. Yet, when the 1^st Congress passed the Bill of Rights way back in the early days of the USA, it wasn’t exactly controversial. In fact, most people were wondering why amendments 1-10 hadn’t been in the Constitution in the first place.

Fast forward 225 years or so, and it seems everyone has their own opinion as to what the Bill of Rights means and what each amendment is ‘intended’ to accomplish. So, why all the controversy? It recently dawned on me that the answer is quite simple. James Madison was just too smart. That’s right, James Madison wrote the Bill of Rights in a style that was educated and verbose – a style that the vast majority of modern Americans are simply too stupid to understand.

For example, in the 1^st Amendment, when Madison states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" it was pretty well understood, in his day, that this merely meant 'no National Church' (i.e. The Church of England). The word established, aside from its normal meaning, also means "to make a state institution of." In light of this definition, and if you realize that the word "respecting" could also be used as "relating to" and that "Congress" is used in place of "the National Government," the idea that "the National Government can't pass a law relating to the creation of a state institution of religion" is pretty clear. Most of you probably didn't even need me to give you all those synonyms. Still, imagine if James Madison had written the amendment in "stupid man's" terms. Then everyone could understand it without the need of complicated synonyms. It'd merely read: "the National Government ain't allowed to create a national church." Badda-Bing! How crystal clear that would be! But, alas, James Madison is *gasp* intelligent; and the 1st amendment requires just a tad bit of intellect to understand.

The same applies to the 2nd Amendment - imagine if it just said: "every freakin' person can own a freakin' gun." How easy would that be! But, again, Madison goes all brainy on us and says "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Gosh, see how much more space Madison's version takes up than my stupid man's version? It's a whole 70 letters longer! Why, there aren't even that many letters in the English alphabet!

Furthermore, it's too bad Justice Anthony Kennedy didn't have a stupid man's version of the 5th Amendment lying around when he was making his decision in Kelo vs. City of New London. To think, a bunch of people in Connecticut have now lost their homes to the government, all because James Madison had to play "smart" when he wrote the Bill of Rights! And imagine how much better off the country would be if, instead of "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people," James Madison had just put; "Congress, keep your friggin' hands OFF whatever powers aren't directly listed as yours in the other parts of the Constitution," for the 10th Amendment.

Sadly, James Madison is perhaps THE most intelligent citizen in the history of the United States - a trait which manifests in his writing. He writes eloquently with 'big words' and 'complex phrases,' that many current American citizens can't understand. Seriously, some Americans whose beliefs are in-line with Madison's probably don't even realize it.Nevertheless, we can still hope that in the future all Americans become intelligent enough to understand Madison's genius. However, I, for one, am not optimistic.