Malcolm Rivera
The United States Constitution, which protects the rights and liberties of its citizens, contains outdated and offensive language that undermines its promise of equality. The 13th Amendment, for instance, abolished slavery, but the Fugitive Slave Clause, which requires escaped slaves to be returned to their masters, remains in the Constitution. Similarly, the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law, yet the Constitution still counts a slave as three-fifths of a person. This racist and gendered language creates a hierarchy of citizenship and does not reflect modern American values of inclusion and equality. Some argue that changing the original text would threaten its integrity, but others believe that erasing these outdated texts is necessary for true reconciliation in a divided nation.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Racist and gendered terms | Removal |
| Obsolete and outdated language | Removal |
| Hateful language | Removal |
Explore related products
$9.99 $9.99
What You'll Learn
Racist and gendered terms
The United States Constitution, despite its promise of equality, contains racist and gendered terms that undermine its proclaimed protection of rights and liberties. These outdated and offensive words stand in stark contrast to modern American values of equality and inclusion and create a hierarchy of citizenship.
One of the most notable examples of racist language in the Constitution is the Three-Fifths Compromise, which stated that slaves were considered three-fifths of a person. This racist clause, still present in the 14th Amendment, undermines the very essence of equal protection under the law. Additionally, the Fugitive Slave Clause in the 13th Amendment, which mandates the return of escaped slaves to their masters, serves as a distressing reminder of America's dark history of slavery.
The Constitution's use of gendered language further perpetuates inequality. While it may not explicitly mention gender, the use of masculine pronouns and assumptions of male authorship contributes to a gender bias that excludes and diminishes the contributions of women. This gendered language fails to represent the diversity of America and reinforces a male-dominated power structure.
The presence of these racist and gendered terms in the Constitution has significant implications for the country's citizens. Schoolchildren studying the Constitution may internalize a sense of hierarchy and exclusion, feeling less welcome in their own nation. The outdated language fails to reflect the modern values of equality and inclusion that America strives for, hindering the feeling of belonging that a constitution should foster among its citizens.
It is important to acknowledge that some have argued against altering the original text of the Constitution, believing that doing so would compromise its integrity. However, failing to address these racist and gendered terms allows the mistakes of the past to remain visible and perpetuates their harmful impact on society. By updating the language, the Constitution can truly embody the values of equality and inclusion it espouses, creating a document that all Americans can proudly embrace as their own.
The Constitution's Ban on Transatlantic Slave Trade: A Historical Perspective
You may want to see also
Outdated language
The United States Constitution, a document that protects rights and liberties, contains outdated language that undermines its promise of equality. The text includes racist and gendered terms that stand in the way of true reconciliation and have no place in modern society. For instance, while the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law, the Constitution still counts a slave as "three-fifths" of a person. Similarly, the 13th Amendment abolishes slavery, but the Fugitive Slave Clause, which requires escaped slaves to be returned to their masters, remains in the Constitution.
The presence of such outdated language weakens the sense of belonging that a constitution should foster among its citizens. It creates a hierarchy of citizenship, making some individuals feel less welcome in their own country. This is particularly impactful when children are first introduced to the Constitution in school, as they may internalize these messages of unequal treatment.
Some argue that changing the founders' original words would threaten the integrity of the Constitution. However, others believe that updates should be integrated into the original text rather than appended at the end, erasing the mistakes of the past. This approach has been taken in other countries, such as Norway, which removed hateful language excluding Jews from its constitution.
By updating the language of the United States Constitution to reflect modern values of equality and inclusion, Americans would have a document that celebrates their diversity and unites them under a shared set of ideals. This revised Constitution would serve as a powerful symbol of the country's commitment to ensuring that all individuals are treated with dignity and respect, regardless of their background or identity.
George Washington's Influence on the US Constitution
You may want to see also
Hateful language
The United States Constitution, which protects the rights and liberties of citizens, contains outdated and offensive language that undermines its promise of equality. The text includes racist and gendered terms that create a hierarchy of citizenship and do not reflect modern American values. This hateful language stands in the way of true reconciliation in a divided country and has no place in any modern society.
For example, the 14th Amendment guarantees that no state shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." However, the Constitution still counts a slave as "three-fifths" of a person, a painful reminder of America's history of slavery. The 13th Amendment abolishes slavery, but the Fugitive Slave Clause, which requires escaped slaves to be returned to their masters, remains in the Constitution.
This outdated language can make some Americans feel less than welcome in their own country and internalize a hierarchy of citizenship. It is essential to update the Constitution to erase these texts and reflect the country's modern values of equality and inclusion. By removing the hateful language, the Constitution would celebrate equality and inclusion and give Americans a text to proudly call their own.
Some may argue that changing the founders' original words would threaten the integrity of the Constitution, as argued by Roger Sherman, one of the few who signed all three of America's constitutive texts. However, James Madison disagreed, believing that changes should be integrated into the original text rather than appended at the end. He argued that it was better to erase the mistakes of the past than to leave them visible.
Other countries have learned this lesson and updated their constitutions to reflect modern values. For instance, the Norwegian Constitution initially included hateful language excluding Jews from the kingdom. This offensive language has since been removed, and the constitution now reflects Norway's current values.
Theories of Democracy: A Constitutional Guide
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$5.53 $5.95
$14.3 $18.99
Obsolete texts
The United States Constitution, which protects rights and liberties, contains obsolete and outdated language that undermines its promise of equality. The 13th Amendment, for example, abolished slavery, but the Fugitive Slave Clause, which requires escaped slaves to be returned to their masters, remains in the Constitution. The 14th Amendment guarantees that no state shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," yet the Constitution still counts a slave as "three-fifths" of a person.
The Constitution's outdated language creates a hierarchy of citizenship, with its racist and gendered terms standing in the way of true reconciliation in a divided country. It is argued that the Constitution's original text should be changed to reflect modern values, just as Norway has done with its own constitution, which once included anti-Semitic language.
Some argue that altering the founders' original words would threaten the integrity of the Constitution. However, others believe that changes should be integrated into the original text, erasing texts that time has overrun and replacing them with language that celebrates equality and inclusion.
By updating the Constitution's language, Americans would have a text that reflects their modern values and in which all citizens can see themselves and their hopes reflected. This would enhance the feeling of belonging that a constitution should generate among its citizens, ensuring that no one feels unwelcome in their own country.
Executive Orders: Constitutional Power or Presidential Overreach?
You may want to see also
Hierarchy of citizenship
The United States Constitution, despite its promise of equality, contains language that undermines this very value. The Constitution's text perpetuates a hierarchy of citizenship, with its outdated and racist language creating a sense of exclusion rather than fostering a feeling of belonging among the country's diverse citizens.
The 13th Amendment, for example, abolished slavery, but the Fugitive Slave Clause remains, serving as a stark reminder of America's historical acceptance of slavery and the dehumanization of African Americans. Additionally, the Constitution still counts a slave as "three-fifths" of a person, a stark contradiction to the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law. These racist remnants in the Constitution create a hierarchy that values white citizens over African Americans, perpetuating a legacy of racial inequality.
The Constitution's gendered language also contributes to a hierarchy of citizenship. The use of masculine pronouns and the exclusion of women's perspectives reinforce a patriarchal system that privileges men over women. This language fails to recognize the equal rights and contributions of women in society, perpetuating gender inequality and a sense of second-class citizenship for women and girls.
Furthermore, the Constitution's failure to address modern societal values contributes to an outdated hierarchy. The text lacks explicit recognition of the rights and contributions of marginalized communities, including people of color, the LGBTQ+ community, and religious minorities. By not explicitly guaranteeing their equal rights and protection under the law, the Constitution inadvertently creates a hierarchy that privileges certain groups over others, perpetuating systemic discrimination and exclusion.
It is crucial to update the language of the Constitution to reflect modern values of equality and inclusion. By eradicating racist and gendered terms, and amending the text to celebrate diversity and ensure the protection of all citizens, the Constitution can become a document that truly unifies all Americans. This updated Constitution would serve as a powerful symbol of the nation's commitment to equality, ensuring that all citizens feel welcomed, valued, and protected by the highest law of the land.
Company Vehicles: Personal Use Boundaries
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The language of the United States Constitution, though claiming to protect rights and liberties, contains racist and gendered words that undermine the promise of equality.
The 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law, still counts a slave as "three-fifths" of a person. The 13th Amendment abolishes slavery but includes the Fugitive Slave Clause, which requires escaped slaves to be returned to their masters.
This language creates a hierarchy of citizenship, making some feel less welcome in their own country. It also normalizes the unjust treatment of certain groups.
Yes, there has been discussion about amending the Constitution to reflect modern values of equality and inclusion. James Madison argued for changes to be integrated into the original text, rather than appended at the end, to erase outdated and painful language.
Some, like Roger Sherman, argue that changing the founders' original words would threaten the integrity of the Constitution. They believe that the text should remain unaltered to preserve its historical context.
