What do you think?
Rate this book
Constitution of the State of Florida
The Constitution of the State of Florida is a foundational document that outlines the laws and governing principles of the state. Written in a detailed and precise manner, this document addresses important issues such as individual rights, governmental structure, and the responsibilities of state officials. The literary style is straightforward and direct, reflecting the seriousness of the subject matter. The context of this document can be traced back to the founding of the state and the need to establish a framework for governance and decision-making. It serves as a vital reference point for understanding the legal framework of Florida and the rights and responsibilities of its citizens. The language used in the Constitution is clear and concise, reflecting the importance of clarity and precision in legal matters. The Constitution of the State of Florida serves as a timeless piece of legislation that continues to guide the state's governance and legal system. Its enduring relevance and significance make it a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the legal foundations of Florida and the principles that shape its government and society.
66 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 15, 2022
5 people are currently reading
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
February 20, 2025
In being a citizen of the United States of America, it is your duty to know your rights. Please read the Constitution of the United States, as well as the Constitution of the state you live in.
Things that pleasantly surprised me: Under the Constitution of the State of Florida, men and women are considered equal under the law.
Note that this section also says "natural persons", not citizens. This is in concurrence with the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution.
Something that didn't surprise me, but also wasn't pleasant, is all of the contradictions within the Constitution (these same contradictions lie within the US Constitution as well). But, at the end of the day, the "golden rule" of both Constitutions is that all persons have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This golden rule is sometimes forgotten by our branches of government, as you can plainly see in the articles that contradict this rule. Our founding fathers did not want our government to overstep their bounds. They wanted us to have as much freedom as possible, so long as we did not infringe upon any other persons "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness". If we follow that one golden rule, we should not need any other laws at all. It is my opinion that any other laws infringe upon those rights.
The founding fathers also wanted the Constitution to stand the test of time, by making it as vague as possible. This had it's pros and it's cons, with the pro and con essentially being the same thing: anyone can interpret it however they like.
Things that pleasantly surprised me: Under the Constitution of the State of Florida, men and women are considered equal under the law.
ARTICLE I, SECTION 2. Basic rights.—All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property. No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability.
Note that this section also says "natural persons", not citizens. This is in concurrence with the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution.
Something that didn't surprise me, but also wasn't pleasant, is all of the contradictions within the Constitution (these same contradictions lie within the US Constitution as well). But, at the end of the day, the "golden rule" of both Constitutions is that all persons have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This golden rule is sometimes forgotten by our branches of government, as you can plainly see in the articles that contradict this rule. Our founding fathers did not want our government to overstep their bounds. They wanted us to have as much freedom as possible, so long as we did not infringe upon any other persons "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness". If we follow that one golden rule, we should not need any other laws at all. It is my opinion that any other laws infringe upon those rights.
The founding fathers also wanted the Constitution to stand the test of time, by making it as vague as possible. This had it's pros and it's cons, with the pro and con essentially being the same thing: anyone can interpret it however they like.
Displaying 1 of 1 review