The "Founding Fathers" are the secular gods of the republic, gathered at Mt. Olympus, er, Independence Hall, plotting and scheming while watching over us. We even have the appropriate Greek and Roman architecture in our national and state capital buildings and courthouses to demonstrate this mythical connection.

As for what they "intended", the built-in paradox of that notion is, in order to do what the framers intended, we must be free to do what we intend on our own. They created the process of amending the Constitution for a reason. If we really wanted to follow their example, we would scrap the document every generation or so, call a new convention, and start from scratch, keeping what works (most of the Bill of Rights, but clarify Amendment II please), tossing away what doesn't, or is irrelevant to today's experience (Amendment III), and of course, create innovations regarding healthcare, terms of office, etc. Think of the constitutions created for Germany and Japan after WWII when we helped them rebuild. Those were forward-looking documents which used our creaky Constitution as inspiration, but did not demand absolute fealty or fidelity.

The mythical pull of the Constitution is owed largely to its continuing longevity, which has caused many of us to revere it as Holy Writ, and therefore, result in a reluctance to tamper with it. Although the amendment process is difficult for a reason - to prevent impulsive changes or inhibit prevailing mob sentiment - it is still not immune to trends or current social norms, hence experiments such as Prohibition. Nor should it be. A truly lasting and flexible document must allow room for error, as long as said errors are correctable. Still, a fresh start every 20-30 years would do a republic good.

Being a secular sort myself, I tend to prefer viewing the framers as flesh-and-blood flawed human beings, people of virtue and vice like the rest of us, rather than the marble deities of a Greek temple. It actually demeans us to deify them. I also never refer to them as the "Founding Fathers" and all the patriarchal baggage it carries. I prefer the generic and pragmatic "framers" in its place. So as a result of this mass religious fervor, we are burdened as a nation with our politicians, pundits, and propagandists scurrying about, aiding and abetting a built-in framers-induced inferiority complex, with their constant utterances of "WWTFFD?" - What Would The Founding Fathers Do?

What of the propagandists and how they demean us? Think of how the framers are constantly being hijacked by the likes of Beck or Limbaugh in order to serve their authoritarian agenda. They project upon the framers their ideology - and because the framers are omnipotent and omniscient gods to those of us with an authoritarian bent, this ideology must be the One and Only Correct Ideology, and as a result, it is easy to marginalize the opposition as un-American heretics.

There are only three words in the Constitition worthy of anything approaching religious reverence, and I hope would remain unaltered if we should ever summon the courage and wisdom necessary to renew the promises of popular rule:

We the people.