Every other Friday, a group of local seniors meet to discuss current political events and how they relate to the U.S. Constitution.

Members often share different opinions on certain topics, but the Constitutional Discussion Group views the differences as an opportunity for conversation and understanding of new perspectives and viewpoints.

On Thursday, three members of the group gave a presentation to over a dozen Senior Center members, covering the basics of the constitution and how it still affects lives today. Anne Waymouth, Anita Mehlman and Herb Fox sat in front of the audience of fellow seniors, each talking about both the constitution and the group.

“I start with the question, have you read the constitution?” asked Waymouth.

Each attendee received a small booklet containing the copy of the Constitution to follow along at certain points and take home to read at their desire.

“Our Constitution has its weaknesses, but it has lasted our country 250 years, which is remarkable,” said Waymouth.

The group explained how the Constitution was first written and talked about the bill of rights and the three branches of the U.S. government to provide background. Mehlman said the Constitution was progressive and revolutionary when it was first written, as there hadn’t been anything like it at the time.

Fox noted despite its purpose, the group is much more than just a discussion group and that members have formed friendships outside of the biweekly meetings.

“The beauty of this group is these ideas that come up as surprises create another level of conversation and understanding,” said Mehlman. “Nobody ever leaves a meeting thinking they should change the way they think.”

Mehlman said she previously belonged to a different current events group, which she found to have a more polarizing environment. She said this group is quite the opposite.

“Our group meetings make me think and then go read and learn about different topics,” said Waymouth.

The group read a passage written by Thomas Jefferson about his opinion of the Constitution before sparking up a discussion about current events like the SAVE Act and whether different governmental branches’ actions have been constitutional.