When you read the Federal Constitution you might find that it contains far more or less than you had thought it did. You might find that it contains something different from what you have been told or were given to understand by others. Is it time perhaps, to change – or correct – your perceptions?
Equally, what could we learn from the original provisions that were in our constitution, and what prompted the changes that have been made to it?
Our constitution – what it was and what it is – has more to tell us about the truth of who we are than any fairy tale or political myth. Isn’t it time you learned the true story?
Recently, some people alleged that The Rakyat Guides booklets published by the MyConstitution Campaign were a "new constitution" or a means of drafting a new constitution.
Are The Rakyat Guides a "new constitution", or merely a summary of key provisions of the original constitution? Read The Rakyat Guides, read the constitution or any textbook on it, and you will have your answer.
What is more interesting, however, is how this allegation could have come about or gained any traction with the public. Is this due to a lack of knowledge of what the constitution says? More alarmingly, is it due to a complete misconception of what the constitution says?
Are some people under the impression that the constitution provides a happily-ever-after, and now have to discover that it in fact provides questions for discussion and debate as much as it does answers?
Have we, as a society or in different pockets of society, brought into being a myth of what the constitution says and does not say, until we do not recognise the actual document?
19/09/10
Equally, what could we learn from the original provisions that were in our constitution, and what prompted the changes that have been made to it?
Our constitution – what it was and what it is – has more to tell us about the truth of who we are than any fairy tale or political myth. Isn’t it time you learned the true story?
Recently, some people alleged that The Rakyat Guides booklets published by the MyConstitution Campaign were a "new constitution" or a means of drafting a new constitution.
Are The Rakyat Guides a "new constitution", or merely a summary of key provisions of the original constitution? Read The Rakyat Guides, read the constitution or any textbook on it, and you will have your answer.
What is more interesting, however, is how this allegation could have come about or gained any traction with the public. Is this due to a lack of knowledge of what the constitution says? More alarmingly, is it due to a complete misconception of what the constitution says?
Are some people under the impression that the constitution provides a happily-ever-after, and now have to discover that it in fact provides questions for discussion and debate as much as it does answers?
Have we, as a society or in different pockets of society, brought into being a myth of what the constitution says and does not say, until we do not recognise the actual document?
19/09/10
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment