...
I should probably preface this by acknowledging that I'm not a constitutionalist because I think the constitution was wrong on certain things and we have a duty to disobey unjust laws.
Having said that, when I was a constitutionalist my problem wasn't with the amendments process so much as the inversion of principles upon which the document was drafted. Like the fact that it was intended to restrict power, not expand it. I also don't think the document can be de facto amended by passing patently unlawful legislation the scotus then upholds a legal... It must actually be amended garnering the requisite two-thirds in both houses.
Hello M:
Or, if you're a Republican you change it by switching a word or two here and there... The amendment process is sooo messy, and sooo long.. Changing a word is MUCH easier..
Here's an example. I've spoken of it before.. When the founders wrote the 5th amendment they said it protected "persons". Everybody is a person, right?? But, Republicans tell me the word PERSON actually means US CITIZEN. The only reason WHY they would say that is if they want to LIMIT freedom to a few.. But, that's NOT what the Constitution is about. It's not even CLOSE. In fact, it's the OPPOSITE..
excon
Yes, we are. It's liberals that want to ignore the parts of the Constitution that make them behave like adults.
And what do you think that the Constitution got wrong? And why are you opposed to working to have those parts amended rather than acting like a reprobate?
The only amendment they are typically concerned with is the 2nd.
Hello again, Red:
Funny... I thought the Constitution was about telling the GOVERNMENT how to behave - NOT the people. I'm astounded by your ignorance of the basic principles this great country was founded on...
excon
Sadly I can't say that I'm astounded by your ignorance as it shows in every post you make.
Have you ever read the Constitution? I mean the entire document, not just the parts you want to argue with or ignore?
Didn't think so . . .
Sounds like you've read it, so can you reference specifically what parts that tell people how to behave like adults?
Hello again, Red:
Sure.. It's NOT very long. The FIRST part, Articles I through VII, say how the government is to be organized. The NEXT 10 Amendments tell the government what it CAN'T do. The REST is about the RIGHTS of the people..
Nowhere, absolutely NOWHERE, does the Constitution tell the PEOPLE how to behave.
excon
The electoral (college) process, lifetime terms for scotus, lack of public recall provisions for fed officials... To name a very few.
Unfortunately, imposition is compulsory and amendments require 2/3 majority whereas I lack so much as a single representative in either house. The document is hardly sacrosanct.
That it does not, and theirs is precisely the inversion I was referring to above.
No. They tend to be the ones who acknowledge that's how it is to work.
To many today don't accept that and think it's wording is pick and choose.
Yeah, I didn't see that either. I'm really interested to know what part Salty is talking about. :/
