That is why we have a system of checks and balances. Even if one or two psychopaths wanted to repeal the first amendment, there is a whole process to go through; and hopefully the rest of us sane people will catch on to what is happening and stop it before total anarchy.

IMO, if you weigh the pros and cons of interpreting the constitution literally vs by its intent, it's much more advantageous to us, as a collective society, to have a little bit of "play." For example, if you jay walk in front of a cop with no traffic for miles, you would expect him to look the other way. If you jay walk in the middle of rush hour, holding up traffic for miles, then you can expect to be cited.

Hey, its not perfect, but it's the best we've got, so let's just try to make it work.

__________________

I would add that a literal interpretation would involve tediously laying out pages upon pages of exactly how a citizen is expected to behave; furthermore, requiring of that citizen to literally memorize each and every set of rules for a specific situation. It is simply not practical in its application.

It is much more practical to simply lay down a set of general principles.

__________________

and the "taking it literally"of a 1900 years old book give or take is what puts is in alot of trouble for countless times.
You dont suggest doing it to teh constitution as well right?

THe founding fathers wrote that taking the time and the cirscunstances htey were into account. Its our right as intelligent people to amend it everytime it does not suit the needs of the current society.

I mean hey, we had to create internet laws right?

Yes, new technologies will always be developing which will force new rules to be created. However, there is no need to compromise on constitutional principles for the modern day world(with the exception of spying on terrorists).

__________________
“Good leaders abhor wrongdoing of all kinds; sound leadership has a moral foundation.”

-Proverbs 16:12