in america its considered normal to treat the constitution like the fifth gospel

@georgia And just like all religious poeple they utterly violate (in the most graphic terms) the spirit of it:)))

@georgia I mean that's how it should be in any country. If you have a foundational document outlining the ethos of the country, it should be something people hold in the highest esteem and demand adherence to within their borders. It's the reason to have a constitution in the first place.

If that's not done then the country eventually becomes full of people who don't care about it at all and would rather run the country in a way completely contrarian to the ideas it was founded on, both locals and outsiders. Which is what happened to the USA and why it's such a disaster now. If 90% of the population were religiously adherent to the constitution, the government would have been overthrown and replaced about 25 atrocities ago.

@nerthos nah its idolatry to regard a man-made text as coequal to a divine one.

@georgia It's only idolatry if you ascribe it divine inspiration or authority. It's not idolatry to treat a country's foundational document as non-arguable law of the land. The country is not a theocracy.

@georgia There's also the HUGE problem of going "divine texts are above the constitution" when building a country because then you'll have 15 different cults doing whatever they want and arguing "my divine text says this is the right way and you said divine text takes priority"
Which is kinda happening in the USA now! if you do that, the only way for the country to have any sort of stability is to decide on one cult and exterminate all others. Which would have gotten you killed long ago.

@nerthos man-made laws are arguable, highest dharma is inarguable. to regard any document besides a divine document as infallible and totally beyond reproach is akin to regarding it as supramundane.

@nerthos I believe that God reveals His law and His word through different religions, through prophets, seers and the revelation of the saints. almost all religions are valid bhakti. when I say the constitution should not be treated as a divine text I dont mean it shouldnt be followed nor do I mean that a nation of many creeds should be replaced by one creed. but sure grab the "youre a minority" low hanging fruit.

@georgia It is necessary in any nation past a certain size, unless you institute a series of selection processes to purge the population of those who would rely on "man made text is subjective and imperfect" to excuse themselves and go against the nation.

I think you confuse strict adherence with belief for infallibility. I've never seen anyone claim any constitution is infallible, they just claim it is inarguable law under normal conditions, which they're right about within their borders. It can only be argued through constitutional courts, in the same way that a divine text is argued by theologians and ecumenical councils, not on the streets when it's convenient.

Plus as I said, if you treat religious scripture as wordly law, all you get are holy wars, because the followers of every religion are 100% sure it's their holy text that's infallible and the rest are infidels. It's either enforcement of wordly law in the physical world, or replacing countries with theocracies with only the official religion's adherents being allowed in (or the third option, perpetual jihad).

@georgia That's a fair enough argument.

>Low hanging fruit is bad!
Statements thought up by the utterly giraffed