MAD-4A wrote:They also don't define the word "is" so that word has no meaning in them? Should there be a preamble that defines every word used in the document? It was a basic concept to those who wrote them.
A constitution has to define where the ultimate power in a society rests. The US Constitution does so in its Preamble: The People, jointly, decide to transfer some of the power they hold into the organs of the US Government as defined by the following text.
For PeterZ's assertion (that the ultimate power in the US rests with the individual and that other countries do not recognize similar rights) to be true, the language in that preamble would have to be different.
Yes, as I said, individual sovereignty is a precursor concept to popular sovereignty. But it is not a legal concept in the context of the Constitution. It certainly isn't a uniquely american concept.
That's all there is to it: If PeterZ wants to claim that other countries do not recognize individual sovereignty based on the language of their constitutions, then what does it say about the US if its Constitution does not include similar language?
Oh, and before I forget, as historically significant as the Declaration of Independence was, it is not a legally binding document for US Citizens or any part of the US Government.