Is The Constitution A Living Document Which Should Change Over Time?

How far can we stretch the U. S. Constitution?

In a recent interview with U. S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on the CBS news program 60 Minutes, correspondent Lesley Stahl raised several questions regrading the U. S. Constitution, since our U. S. Supreme Court is charged with interpreting our Constitution and normally making a final decision on any Constitutional issues.

Justice Scalia practices a philosophy of what he calls "originalism", meaning that he chooses to interpret our Constitution based on the meanings and intentions of the people who ratified it over 200 years ago. He went further to say, "Society doesn't change through a Constitution."

Even though our Constitution is certainly an enduring document that we must all defend each and every day, our Constitution is not a "living" document that requires amending each time a rogue judge wants to create "rights" not actually in our Constitution or when we want the Constitution to say what we would like for it to say?

The words in our Constitution should be interpreted with the same meanings of the people who ratified it?