preamble to the u.s. constitution
131460
It is to briefly explain what Americans were fighting for and what they expected in the shaping of a better America, so that issues concerning everything around us, could be properly managed for "WE the people of the United States in order to form a more perfect union and establish justice to ensure domestic tranquility and provide for the common defense promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our prosperity do ordain  to establish this Constitution for the United States of America.\nEach of the points stated in the preamble signfy what we as Americans stand for and believe in.
279880
You are right. As a matter of fact, the preamble of the Constitution mentions "blessings". Who else gives us blessings but God?\n\n"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." -The US Constitution
531775
Try the secretary of state's web site.  I'm sorry I don't know what it is.  I found the text of Amendment 3 on there.  I'm sure the others are too.
406382
The politicians in America have ignored the basics of the Constitution almost since it's inception. Check out your facts. There was an original clause in the Constitution that stated if this document did not work anymore that it would be time to establish a new one. But, the politicians added an amendment that makes a person a traitor if they try to change the document in question. So, who is more guilty?
384734
constitution, principles of government\n \n \nfundamental principles of government in a nation, either implied in its laws, institutions, and customs, or embodied in one fundamental document or in several. In the first category—customary and unwritten constitutions—is the British constitution, which is contained implicitly in the whole body of common and statutory law of the realm, and in the practices and traditions of the government. Because it can be modified by an ordinary act of Parliament, the British constitution is often termed flexible. This enables Britain to react quickly to any constitutional emergency, but it affords no fundamental protections of civil or personal liberty, or any areas in which parliamentary legislation is expressly forbidden. The theory of the social contract, developed in the 17th cent. by Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, was fundamental to the development of the modern constitution. The Constitution of the United States, written in 1787 and ratified in 1789, was the first important written constitution, and a model for a vast number of subsequent constitutional documents. Though to a large extent based on the principles and practices of the British constitution, the Constitution of the United States has superior sanction to the ordinary laws of the land, interpreted through a process of judicial review that passes judgment on the constitutionality of subsequent legislation, and that is subject to a specially prescribed process of amendment. The rigidity of its written format has been counterbalanced by growth and usage: in particular, statutory elaboration (see Congress of the United States) and judicial construction (see Supreme Court, United States, and Marshall, John) have kept the written document abreast of the times. But a written constitution, without a commitment to its principles and civil justice, has often proved to be a temporary or rapidly reversed gesture. In the 18th, 19th, and 20th cent., many countries, having made sharp political and economic departures from the past, had little legal custom to rely upon and therefore set forth their organic laws in written constitutions—some of which are judicially enforced. Adolf Hitler never formally abolished the constitution of the Weimar Republic, and the protections of personal liberties contained in the Soviet constitution of 1936 proved to be empty promises. Since the 1960s, many of the newly independent countries of Asia and Africa have adopted written constitutions, often on the model of the American, British, or French constitutions.   1\nSee E. McWhinney, Constitution-Making (1981); V. Bhagwan and V. Bhushan, World Constitutions (2d ed. 1987); P. Bobbitt, Constitutional Interpretation (1991); J. W. Peltason, Understanding the Constitution (12th ed. 1991).
404504
The constitution provides a legal foundation for our\nlaws and our cival discourse. Disputes and questions regarding\nall manner of civall and criminal conduct have a final\narbiture with the Supreme court and the federal and state courts.
362469
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights ...hope this will help
543621
As written in Article 11 of the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli:\n\n"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
268621
The Constitution has a total of 27 amendments. The first ten, collectively known as the Bill of Rights, were ratified simultaneously. The following seventeen were ratified separately.\n\nTo learn more about the amendments click here\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution#Amendments
22965
With all due respect, your stated desire doesn’t make any sense.  The ten articles of the United States Bill of Rights are written in clear language with most economical use of the language.  There are only 462 words of content in all ten amendments.\n\nIt would be interesting to know what is your intended use.  In my seminars I find that rather than summarize them I have to expand from both a origin perspective as well as from a case law perspective.  To do less is to cloud them in misunderstandings.     \n\nIf this is a class project, have your instructor contact me and I'll explain why this is not possible, something the instructor should already know.
8517
The constitution specifically says, "The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."\n\nThey clearly anticipated these amendments modifying the original document. In fact, many of the amendments have revised the original. Changing the election of Senators and Representatives to popular election, changing the way the number of representatives was calculated, changing the day Congress convenes, and allowing income tax are just a few of the major revisions to the original that have come about by the amendments.
348949
1. a. Declaration of Independance\n    b. Articles of the confederation\n    c. Bill of Rights\n    d. Constitution\n  (these are a few of them)\n\n2. a. Alexander Hamilton \n    b. Ben Franklin\n    c. George Washington\n    d.James McHenry\n    e. David Brearley
539537
How about being the first state to ratify the Constitution?
494762
The Constitution.  It is the First Amendment to the Constitution.  The first 10 Amendments are referred to as the Bill of Rights.
10959
The original constitution of 1777 is at the website below.
272984
From The Constitution of the United States:\n\nArticle. II.\nSection. 1.\n\nBefore he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: \n--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."--\n\nI QUOTE "PRESIDENT" Bush :\n\nThe U.S. Constitution is "just a goddamned piece of paper,"      http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml \nhttp://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2005/091205pieceofpaper.htm\n\nThis Statement Is Impeachable In Itself, \nWith Strong Grounds For REMOVAL FROM OFFICE   \n\nArticle. IV\nSection. 4.\n\nThe United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall PROTECT EACH OF THEM AGAINST INVASION, and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE\n\nTo Answer Your Question - YES, The inaction concerning illegal immigration on the part of President Bush an impeachable offense\n******************\nIf NOT Impeached, Or Removed From Office\n\nFrom The BILL Of RIGHTS\n\nAmendment II\nA 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. \n\nAmendment X\nThe 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\n****************************\n\n"To announce that there must be No Criticism of  the president, \nOr that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, \nis not only unpatriotic and servile, \nbut is morally treasonable to the  American public.\n— Theodore   Roosevelt\n*****************\nThe Military MUST, by THEIR Constitutional and Code requirements, obey LAWFUL ORDERS. It must be pointed out to them, and particularly the leadership, that it is REQUIRED OF THEM TO QUESTION WHETHER THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF IS MEETING HIS/HER obligations to use them in a lawful and truthful manner and to act in the DEFENSE and BEST INTEREST of this Country.
546916
the first ten ammendments of the constitution...basically mean this:\n\n1. freedom of religion, speech, press and assembly\n\n2. right to own firearms\n\n3. a soldier must have permission from a houses owner to stay there\n\n4. rights against illegal search and siezure\n\n5. basically you can't be tried twice for the same crime and due process of prosecution \n\n6. more rights on due process...speedy trial and right to counsel\n\n7. right of trial by jury...interesting note...it says anything over $20.00...\n\n8. no excessive bail or cruel or unusual punishment\n\n9. basically you can't use the constitution against people..\n\n10. this ammendment seems to give power to individual states to govern themselves of things not in the constitution to wit..\n\nHeres the whole Bill Of Rights:\n\nTHE BILL OF RIGHTS\nAmendments 1-10 of the Constitution\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nThe Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution; \n\nResolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely: \n\n\nAmendment I\nCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. \n\n\nAmendment II\nA 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. \n\n\nAmendment III\nNo soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. \n\n\nAmendment IV\nThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. \n\n\nAmendment V\nNo person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. \n\n\nAmendment VI\nIn all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. \n\n\nAmendment VII\nIn suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury s