Nearly two dozen World Heritage Sites, which have been found by the United Nations Eduational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization to offer outstanding global value for their cultural and natural resources, can be found in the United States. And the National Park Service has just made it easier to locate them.
The Park Service's newest online travel itinerary page touches on the 22 World Heritage Sites located in the United States. On this site you can discover fun facts and interesting background information about sites across the country, from the Statue of Liberty National Monument to Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park, which have universal significance.
Most of the World Heritage Sites in the United States are administered by the National Park Service. They also are listed entirely or contain listings in the National Register of Historic Places, which is expanded and maintained by the National Park Service.
The World Heritage Sites in the United States itinerary is the 60th in the online Discover Our Shared Heritage Travel Itinerary Series. The series supports historic preservation, promotes public awareness of history, and encourages people to visit historic places throughout the country. The National Park Service’s Heritage Education Services and its Office of International Affairs produced this itinerary in partnership with the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers.
Comments
I agree Rick, my lack of expertise in the field of constitutional law aside, the reading I have done indicates that those involved in writing the constitution had many discussions, disagreements and made compromises. T. Jefferson even felt that each generation had the right to make changes, this reflected in the amendments to the document. I have always felt that things "written in stone", "zero tolerance" polices, etc, are counterproductive. Times change, new information, science, pressing issues of population, distribution of resources, well the list is endless, require new conversations.
The historians please correct me if I am wrong, but one example is a women's right to vote. Was it Abigail Adams that told her husband, John, "remember the ladies"? Abigail, wrote her husband urging the document with the wording "all men are created equal" be changed to all men and women or all persons. The future President wrote back, "(that) we know better than to repeal our Masculine systems".
1) I don't know what this means. Are you saying that the Constitution is not subject to intepretation?
2) Where does the Consitution say that the Federalist Papers, etc. and/or the intent of the Founders should be consulted in order to correctly intepret the Constitution?
Yes Ron, and the Constitution provides a way to change to accomodate those. Ignoring the actually wording and just "interpreting" it differently isn't that way. In fact it was exactly that which the Founding Fathers were trying to prevent. What purpose would the Constitution serve if it could be altered or ignored at the will of the current administration?
I am saying the Founding Fathers had an intent when they wrote the Constitution. Any "interpretation" that is contrary to that intent is a perversion of the intent - and thereby of the Constitution.
Nowhere - because they didn't anticipate the Constitution to be "interpreted". But it was the common practice of early efforts to "interpret" because pre the progressive era, there was a desire to follow the intent of the Founders if there was a lack of clarity and that is the core position of the Tea Party today, to follow the intent of the Founders
{added} And even today "legislative intent" is an important element in many court decisions.
1) Which "Founding Fathers"? You seem to be using this phrase to refer a discrete and easily identifiable number of men who co-wrote the document. And how do we know what their "intent" was, when even scholars disagree about the meaning of, for example, the Federalist Papers?
2)Who didn't anticipate this?
3) And, again, why should the "intent of th Founders"--whatever this means--be the basis of a "correct" interpretation of the Constitution?
Because there are a discrete and easily identifiable number of men who co-wrote the document let by James Madision who was a major contributor to the Federalist Papers and quite clear in his intent.
So, who are they?
ec--Honest, intelligent people read the Constitution differently, even though the words remain constant. A good example is the Second Amendment. A better way to make your argument is to say that your interpretation (or mine) is written in stone. And even my interpretation (or yours, I imagine) has changed over time due to the conditions that Ron mentioned.
Ignoring the Constitution has been a charge leveled at any number of administrations, not just the current one. That's why Federal courts exist and why the Senate must confirm the people the President proposes to appoint to them. I'm sure that is what the authors of the Constitution had in mind.
Rick