Good Morning, Paule
You say you think the founders of our nation were too idealistic when they wrote our Constitution. I disagree. Even a most cursory review of the drafting of our Constitution, and of the 85 Federalist Papers in which James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton sought to describe and explain that document, will show that view to be incorrect. The founders were fully aware of the vagaries of human nature and did their utmost to create a document that would withstand them.
You posit that things might improve if we move toward a more theocratic society, which you feel "was designed by our founding fathers".
Our founding fathers did not design a theocratic society. Theocracy is, "government by priests claiming to rule by divine authority." It is clear from everything written about the founding of our nation that the founders rejected any notion of theocracy. You can say that religion had a greater influence on the society of the 1700's than it does today (and I would agree with you), but it was in no sense a theocracy.
When you suggest the move to a more theocratic society, you do not make clear which theocracy you espouse. Since we have a substantial mix of religions in our country, which do you suggest should take control of our government?
You mention that the people emulate leaders who have no morals or ethics. It's true that morality is a top-down phenomenon, but the problem is that you can not legislate morality. If we want principled leaders, we must devise a method of selecting them ... and that is "The only problem with our current system"
Obviously, though, that leaves the question of how we can select principled leaders? Can we devise a method of doing that?
Fred
AI
