Strict or Loose Constructionism Today our courts are faced with many hard decesions, but the decision that is the hardest is the way that the justices conform to the constitution. There is a spectrum of interpretation. Some justices believe in strict constructionalism, but others believe in loose constructionalism. This is a hard topic of debate. I think that the view of loose constructionalism is a better view. The fathers of our country had no idea about what our country would become. The need for the constitution to adapt to our changing country is crucial. The technology is getting better every day. The internet is just one example of a place where that needs adaption. There are poor regulations for the use of pornography. This is not a place for complete freedom of speech. There may be room for pornography on the internet, but it needs to be in a secure site. Rules need to adapt this enviroment. We can not have total freedom of speech in such a place where explicit material is so close to minors. This is one example of the many problems that loose constructionalism deals with. It is also important that our country and courts not develop too loose of a view. We need to keep our country heading towards the vision that our founders had. It is important not to loose site of that. They layed the frame, and we have to develop the rest according to the needs of our society. In conclusion, I think that my view falls on the loose side of the spectrum, but not way out there. I think that it is crucial to follow the plans that were set in 1787. Our society needs the flexibilty to be able to adapt to the changing times and technology. I think that our country and courts are doing good job interpreting the constitution and making policy for us to live by.