The main point of our Constitution is that the majority would not be able to determine what can be passed or not passed, but instead the Constitution would determine what the majority can pass or not pass.
Make sure you read the part on what Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton all agreed on, and that is if almost every person in every state, in every class, and in every subculture, feels a change to the Constitution is necessary, then Washington and the States may amend the Constitution. Anything else would be tyranny of the majority! Its why our Constitution isn't a living document. America would have folded long ago if it was a living document.
If the whims of the majority can dictate what the Constitution really means. Then the majority can decide to pass or not pass any law they want based on what the Constitution ought to say.
Thomas Jefferson forecast that Americans may loose faith in the Constitution and it’s underlying principles, and that to avoid a de-facto tyranny of the majority, we ought to have a referendum in the nation to change the Constitution every few years or decades. Hamilton, under PUBLEUS, in the Federalist Papers, responded to this critique; he said that any and all societal whims (majority whims), and he used ‘society’ as a term explicitly numerous times, of which the Constitution exists to limit in power, would be fully empowered by a scheduled Constitution referendum; for all they would have to do to implement a tyrannous agenda is wait for the next referendum!
Madison agreed, and eventually, so too did Jefferson. They all agreed with how Madison and Hamilton framed the situation on how to change the Constitution; when almost every person in every state, in every class, and in every subculture, feels a change to the Constitution is necessary, then Washington and the States may amend the Constitution. We did this when we ended slavery! This process, of super-majorities and assuring everyone (or almost everyone) is on board with a change in the Constitution, assures that minority voices won’t get tramples on in the debate on an amendment change, and in turn, their Natural Rights won’t get trampled on. PUBLEUS also added if we ever need to draw up a new Constitution, it would only be after generations of tyranny, and a refusal by government to follow the words of the Constitution. John Locke, the grandfather of Republican ideology, agreed with this postulate, as did Jefferson and Washington.
We’re starting on that slippery slope, early in our history of government that doesn’t follow the Constitution. We are down this path not due to a disregard for the Constitution, but due to a fallacious ideal; the ideal that the Constitution says whatever society at the time demands that it says, aka “Living Breathing” thesis.