I'm so disappointed after reading the constitutional amendment thread

[familydog]

Amendments are only constitutional if you agree with it....apparently.

 

[freelance]

Most of it seems to be "govt. shall" instead of "govt. shall not." Totally bassackwards, and I couldn't get past the first few either.

 

[klamath]

It is kind of like, "What federals laws would you like to pass." What part of getting the federal government out of passing laws to solve our problems and returning it to the states did they miss about RP's message?

 

[ConstitutionGal]

If you've ever said "there ought to be a law" then you don't understand the concept of the proper role of government.

 

[HollyforRP]

I've seen people abusing their power left and right. I think people should have freedom but not if they abuse it and use it to stalk, harass and impose their will on other people in a neagative way.

I don't think officials are free to rig elections.

I don't think freedom of press should be "You get to do whatever you want even if it hurts others"

There is a line and people have blurred that line in order to control and hurt others. I think the constitution should be followed but should also be clearly told to people that freedom doesn't give you the right to bully others in any shape or form.

I've noticed a trend of it's okay to bully people. Those that are bullied and harassed are only bullied some more if they speak up about it. These distinctions need to be talked about to put those people in their place. The problem is when people feel no retribution for their harmful actions and it is encouraged, it grows like a virus. Others cheer them on and give the false impression that it is okay when clearly it is not!

 

[DeanToPaulIn4Years]

Here's one:

Anyone found guilty of purposely manipulating a federal election will be imprisoned for life or exiled.

 

[killatop]

I don't know exactly what you are talking about but ammending the constitution is constitutional! Do whatever you want just make sure you have the respect for the constitution and actually ammend it instead of going around it. I think that's all RP really wants.

 

[Goldwater Conservative]

Honestly, the most important constitutional amendment we need is to underline everything twice and make it mandatory to print it in a 72-point font size.

 

[pilby]

If you've ever said "there ought to be a law" then you don't understand the concept of the proper role of government.

oh.... i say "there ought to be a law" occasionally, but i usually mean laws outlawing certain behavior by the govt (that's exactly what the Constitution is).


my big idea for a Constitutional amendment is this -

EVERY law passed by Congress and every new govt dept created automatically sunsets after at most 7 (length is debatable) years.

can you imagine the impact of that? i've mentioned it to several people and they say things like, "but then Congress would spend all their time reauthorizing old laws and wouldn't have time to make new ones" and to that i say, "and... what's the problem?"

if we had something like that in place, it would be much harder for govt to just gradually grow and grow and grow. every 7 years, politicians would have to defend laws and programs in order to get them reauthorized for another 7.

 

[Sematary]

Amendments are only constitutional if you agree with it....apparently.

You fail to understand my point, apparently.
The amendments I saw being offered up did not serve the purpose of preserving the rights of the citizen but were being offered up as a way to "get back at" the system we now have in place. You can't sugarcoat the fact that the amendment process is there to provide for the protections of the rights of citizens and nothing else. The constitution serves only that purpose.

 

[Sematary]

I've seen people abusing their power left and right. I think people should have freedom but not if they abuse it and use it to stalk, harass and impose their will on other people in a neagative way.

I don't think officials are free to rig elections.

I don't think freedom of press should be "You get to do whatever you want even if it hurts others"

There is a line and people have blurred that line in order to control and hurt others. I think the constitution should be followed but should also be clearly told to people that freedom doesn't give you the right to bully others in any shape or form.

I've noticed a trend of it's okay to bully people. Those that are bullied and harassed are only bullied some more if they speak up about it. These distinctions need to be talked about to put those people in their place. The problem is when people feel no retribution for their harmful actions and it is encouraged, it grows like a virus. Others cheer them on and give the false impression that it is okay when clearly it is not!

But I saw people proposing amendments that would "control" the media or "control" special interests. Do you believe that the constitution was designed for that purpose? All of those things can be controlled by laws, but should they be? And, if some of those things should - shouldn't it be handled at the state level? Is an amendment to the constitution the proper way to handle media bias? Really?

 

[constituent]

well, so help me out w/ the wording of an amendment that provides legal protection for those who would seek to "abolish" the government as a form of recourse for gross violations against the human rights of the people.

as of now, it's "illegal" to even advocate.

 

[Sematary]

oh.... i say "there ought to be a law" occasionally, but i usually mean laws outlawing certain behavior by the govt (that's exactly what the Constitution is).


my big idea for a Constitutional amendment is this -

EVERY law passed by Congress and every new govt dept created automatically sunsets after at most 7 (length is debatable) years.

can you imagine the impact of that? i've mentioned it to several people and they say things like, "but then Congress would spend all their time reauthorizing old laws and wouldn't have time to make new ones" and to that i say, "and... what's the problem?"

if we had something like that in place, it would be much harder for govt to just gradually grow and grow and grow. every 7 years, politicians would have to defend laws and programs in order to get them reauthorized for another 7.

I believe downsizedc.org has some good legislation they are trying to get through and the most important is simply getting the legislators to actually read the bills.
I also believe that before a bill can even be sent to the president, it must pass through a committee of constitutional experts - not elected by the people - that will determine constitutionality or lack thereof. If they find the bill lacking - send it back with suggestions for revision to make it constitutional. This crap with the Judiciary getting it AFTER the damage is done is great but we could clear up a big caseload if constitutionality were determined prior to submission to the president.
And, you don't need an amendment to do it - a simple law stating that the government must adhere to these regulations should be sufficient.

 

[Sematary]

well, so help me out w/ the wording of an amendment that provides legal protection for those who would seek to "abolish" the government as a form of recourse for gross violations against the human rights of the people.

as of now, it's "illegal" to even advocate.

We already have the means to "abolish" our government. It is called elections and it is up to US to wake America up to the corruption and the bullshit and get it done.

 

[constituent]

We already have the means to "abolish" our government. It is called elections and it is up to US to wake America up to the corruption and the bullshit and get it done.

i believe that's "alter." i'm talking about "abolish," as in secession.

 

[davidkachel]

I would argue that amendments can be useful. For instance, the bill of rights comes in handy occasionally.

I thought Bush and McCain had declared the Bill of Rights "out of date"?

 

[obsolescence]

Yeah, I was alarmed by some of the amendments proposed in that thread.

I realized a while ago that many people on this board don't share Dr. Ron Paul's belief in federalism and individual liberty.

 

[davidkachel]

Remember all, this "freedom" thing is still an experiment in its infancy and the ruling class has been brainwashing us for 100 years or more.
It is nearly everyone's ingrown inclination to say "there oughta be a law" or "let's amend the Constitution" without realizing those attitudes take us right back down exactly the same path that got us here (where we don't want to be).
We may be waking up, but we are still largely brainwashed. Just imagine how thoroughly indoctrinated the rest of the population is! This is gonna take a while.

 

[Sematary]

Remember all, this "freedom" thing is still an experiment in its infancy and the ruling class has been brainwashing us for 100 years or more.
It is nearly everyone's ingrown inclination to say "there oughta be a law" or "let's amend the Constitution" without realizing those attitudes take us right back down exactly the same path that got us here (where we don't want to be).
We may be waking up, but we are still largely brainwashed. Just imagine how thoroughly indoctrinated the rest of the population is! This is gonna take a while.

You speak truly Master Yoda

 

[pacelli]

I think some people were just using the thread as an excuse to vent their frustrations with this whole election process and everything corrupt associated with it.