It has good parts and had a lot of bad parts. It was written centuries ago, so let’s take that framing into consideration. It was a worthwhile endeavor to pursue the good parts while amending the bad, directly or via modern courts. Unfortunately it’s been a backsliding battle against conservatives who selectively interpret it as “originalists”, like they selectively interpret their bible to enhance their power and pocketbook and ignore the parts that are inconvenient or get between them and money, and obstinately refuse change or would actively change it for the worse.
The most ironic part is that the countries that the US fought with in WW2 that had some absolutely awful leadership and governance were outfitted with relatively excellent frameworks to govern with postwar, Germany and Japan, while the US has been crippled with resting on its laurels and mulish refusal to take the lessons learned those endeavors to heart.
It has good parts and had a lot of bad parts. It was written centuries ago, so let’s take that framing into consideration. It was a worthwhile endeavor to pursue the good parts while amending the bad, directly or via modern courts. Unfortunately it’s been a backsliding battle against conservatives who selectively interpret it as “originalists”, like they selectively interpret their bible to enhance their power and pocketbook and ignore the parts that are inconvenient or get between them and money, and obstinately refuse change or would actively change it for the worse.
The most ironic part is that the countries that the US fought with in WW2 that had some absolutely awful leadership and governance were outfitted with relatively excellent frameworks to govern with postwar, Germany and Japan, while the US has been crippled with resting on its laurels and mulish refusal to take the lessons learned those endeavors to heart.