Why the Founders Established Governments Embodied Constitution

Why the Founders Established Governments Embodied Constitution

Introduction

The founding fathers of the constitution hold that when men live without a common, they are in a cold war condition. The desire to eliminate the cold war among them, and thus they had a collective endeavor to destroy each other. People had to stay without a standard power to keep them in awe. The government works at this time in support of “faith-based education.” The Supreme Court supports the move of the government by terming it to be fully constitutional. The court proceeds to champion the movement as a good deal, and parents can consider embracing it. The pathology of fundraising is evident as the members defend the need to recognize committees. The requirement regarding changing the franking rules is also apparent in the meeting. The purpose of this paper is to expose why the founders established the government-embodied constitution. The article will explore how the founding fathers justify the structure of the government as in the composition (Hobbes). Aspects of the Supreme Court ruling on the case regarding civil and religious liberties are evident in this paper. The article will further discuss why the legislative branch is often known as the “broken branch.”

How the founding fathers justify independence and structure

The founders of the constitution hold that the weaker man has an equal strength necessary to beat the strongest. They thus hold that men are at a point of being equal than being unequal. These founders further purport that men have no pleasures. Thus, keeping the companion involves seeing similar value on their counterparts as we value ourselves. Therefore, the love for one another is apparent since they value on the security requirements of other people (Rousseau). To achieve equality, the need to find finding the principal cause of quarrel as diffidence, difference, and glory is vital. Thus, the founders concentrated on what causes feuds amongst themselves, what causes beauty, and differentiation. Generally, independence had to endure a long path.

The findings from the arguments were that people quarrel to gain something. The aftermath of being in a feud among people is to end up winning a given goal. Differences among people further result from aspects of safety as people need to defend themselves. Reputation was also the central reason behind the glory among human beings. They came up with assertions that men without a conventional power develop aspects of the cold war. The feuds among them could thus also result from a lack of central authority. Diffidence due to low self-esteem was also a primary cause of conflicts as other people could not offer self-defense—the cold-war results from every man having a feud with every man. Thus, the condition of lack of peace develops due to the effects of lacking leadership.

The desire to eliminate cold war effects and probability led to calls for several protections on the persons by the law. The state had the power to dispose of their possessions as if they think of fitness. They felt this to be a state of liberty where an individual had a choice of arranging their belongings. The people were also at the freedom of destroying themselves in this statue (Paine). The revolutionary war involves the founding fathers reframing the constitution to solve the problems affecting people in societies. The founding fathers of the nation had in mind the idea of forming a representative democracy. They, therefore, hold that independence inculcates, making people avoid conflicts, differences, and enhance their glory. The aspirations of the people and the need to live in peace were dominant among the founding fathers. Generally, the founders of the constitution have a desire to integrate the nation with the law to protect the people.

The belief that absolute power corrupts made the founding fathers form a government that did not allow too much authority or control. With the confidence in the mind of the founders, they came up with a government that provides for the separation of powers. The principle of separating capabilities was to diversify the ruling to ensure that each arm organized its own goals for success. The constitution came up with the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive. The legislative powers were further in the congress to the House of Representatives and the senate (Hobbes). The president and the vice president headed the executive, while the judiciary was the court system. The central driving force for this was to build up a country where one person had no absolute authority. The division of power among the three led to the structure of the government. Generally, the formation of the government as the executive, the judiciary, and the executive originates. Therefore, the need to regulate the powers of the arms of government led to the structure of the government of separating power.

How the Supreme Court interpreted cases of civil liberties

The Supreme Court championed for the formation of schools that were religious-based as the agreement from the government. The secretary of education was in support of the movement that regarded those students to have a chance to attend faith-based schools. Regardless of the assertions of Montana that other 37 states direct or indirect aid of the religious organizations. The case in Montana inculcates the church and the nation. By the year 2017, several justices could not ban the grants of the school church from the state. 70% of those who had qualifications for private schools had barriers from religion.

Further, conflict arose from the part of the constitution that asserted that public funds to be prohibited from secretarial purposes (Barnes). Thus, according to this section, the church, seminary, had absolute control sector of the domination. Generally, the court case involved the Supreme Court solving the case of funding schools and the services of the church.

Ellingson and other people filed a brief which was requiring the Supreme Court to delegate voters in approving the new constitution. This brief involves restraining public funds for improving school systems. They hold that the state would come with that clause in barring support of the private and religious education. Therefore, the formers of the new constitution had a central role in stopping the government’s support for the spiritual practices of the school. The petitioners had arguments that the government does not direct its support to a non-religious school. In this case, they, therefore, expect the government to withdraw support from the religious school just like those of the non-religious. They further assert that the application of constitutional keeps the government from supporting ethical practices. Therefore, the petitioners were in the opinion of equality among religious and non-religious persons.

Ministerial exemption urges that religious institutions may choose the body to embody the faith of the school. Practically, the laws that prohibit discrimination based on race, disability, gender, and other traits may appear as ministers. However, a few judges argue that the constitution discriminates their clergy, unanimous decision lied on the Supreme Court (Barnes). The presence of clauses serves as a barrier for the government to appoint ministers. Thus, the Catholic Church endured discrimination to bar women. In response to this, the Supreme Court came up with a wide range of factors to consider while deciding counts in courts. Significant training on the employee caused an array of concerns regarding the doctrine of the church. Biel and Morrissey claim on how particular teachers of the school made qualifications to be ministers. Generally, the Supreme Court comes up with an array of factors to consider as an employee.

In this case, the Supreme Court made a ruling that it was legal for learners to choose a faith-based school. This argument follows the earlier decision of the government to work in the supports of organizations of faith. The ruling of the Supreme Court ruling meant that students would enjoy the right to practice religion in their schools. Therefore, the government made a decision that was supported by the Supreme Court granting rights of worship to learners.

Why the legislative branch is known as the “broken branch.”

The legislative branch is known to be a “broken branch” due to the congress’s failure to the US citizens.  For the past 25 years, congress steadily grows feeble. Analyzers argue that decay requires new brains to solve the overwhelming problem. The deterioration of congress gives it a term of being a “broken branch” (Drutman). Congress tends to grow feebler with time. The legislative branch has also been broken due to the lack of retaining the skilled staff to succeed. The amendment of the constitution will thus involve maintaining more skilled persons in congress to boost their skills. Generally, the legislative branch is known to be a broken branch due to its continuous decay.

Pascrell explores the core problem affecting the legislative to come back from the underinvestment. The solution to this problem can undergo drastic reformation on the allowances to keep the staff. The brokenness of congress further suffers deterioration due to a lack of benefits. The team has never enjoyed any contributions which may prevent them. The draining of the congress’ most skilled persons has a deter to fostering the breaking of the congress. The healing process of the congress revolves around working to retain then the most trained staff of the legislative arm. Lack of expertise in the faculty of these members is a challenge as the power of knowledge is absent. Therefore, the lack of expertise in congress is a deter which leads to the breaking of the senate.

Ethical failure is another breakdown facing the legislative group. The members have challenges on the committees that organize the ethical behaviors of these groups. The change of the franking rules has been the central goal of the committee. However, Congress fails to meet its goals. The inadequate rationale of the schedule has continuously served as a challenge making the department a broken one as they do not enjoy proper organization (Drutman). The “broken branch” is not able to accurately organize itself to serve its people. The wanting ethical standards of the group further deteriorate the failure of the department. Therefore, the “broken branch” results from the constant failure of the organization in diverse ethical aspects.

Conclusion

The founders of the constitution came up with the law for centering on the diverse reasons of importance. The law was apparent to solve problems regarding feuds among the people. The analysis came up with conclusions that people mostly end up in disputes due to self-defense desires (Locke). The structure of the constitution was central to the separation of powers. The main reason behind the separation of powers was to avoid over-empowering one person. The diversification of power among the three arms of the government reduced the control of each division to ensure success. The government is the main body that performs the duties of administration in the country. The Supreme Court asserted that it was constitutional for schools to enjoy faith-based religion (Barnes). The ruling was in support of the earlier assertions of the government regarding faith and schooling. This ruling allowed the government to support activities outside the general learning environment, such as religious practices. The legislative is usually known as the “broken branch” since the people feel that the arm has not performed the expected. It has underperformed in the aspects of ethical practices and underinvestment. Thus, the “broken branch” results from the inability of the branch to effectively represent its people.

Work Cited

Barnes, Robert. “Religious-Schools Case Heads to a Supreme Court Skeptical of Stark Lines

Between Church and State”. (2020)

Frey Katherine “The Supreme Court Will Hear 2 Major Cases About When Religious Schools

Can Ignore Civil Rights Laws”.  At Stake: A Society in Which Civil Rights Laws Aren’t Optional For Religious Employers. (2019)

Drutman, Lee. “How to Fix Congress- According to Congress.” Pay Staff More. Improve

 Technology. And Think Big. (2019)

Hobbes, Thomas. “Excerpts From Leviathan.” (1651).

Keena Alex, Michael Latner, Charles Smith, and McGann Anthony. “Here’s How to Fix Partisan

Gerrymandering, Now That the Supreme Court Kicked to the States”. (2019)

Locke, John. Excerpts From the Second Treatise of Civil Government 1689 of the State of

Nature. (1689).

Paine, Tom. “Common Sense.” (1776).

Rousseau, Jean “The Social Contract” (1762).