Equal Worth Amendment

[rtwngAvngr]

What a socialist gob of goo.

 

[007]

----------------
EQUAL WORTH AMENDMENT (EWA; Revised March 12, 2005)

Section 1. It is the most irrevocable doctrine of this Constitution that each and every citizen of the United States is fundamentally of equal worth and value in self, solely on the basis of being a member of the human race, unconditionally and unexceptionally.

Section 2. Each and every citizen of the United States has the inherent and inalienable basic right to be related to as an equal worth and value in self by all other citizens.

Section 3. Each and every citizen of the United States has the inherent and inalienable basic responsibility to relate to all other citizens as of equal worth and value in themselves.

Section 4. No laws of the United States shall be considered valid if they create or perpetuate a condition in violation of the principles set forth in this article.

Section 5. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

----------------

EQUAL WORTH AMENDMENT (EWA): THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION

What you and I have in common is that we are both human beings--and that is why, at the very least, we are equal. In this respect, fundamentally, neither you nor I are superior or inferior to one another--we are each of equal worth and value in self; that is, solely on the basis of you and I being members of the human race. Is this fundamental stance regarding equality wrong? Yes or No? If it is wrong, please provide an alternative stance upon which our fundamental equality is based.



Post edited by moderator (merlin1047). Website links removed as this post is primarily intended as advertising and not as a discussion item. Board Rule 7- Advertising -There is absolutely no advertising allowed! (Unless you want to pay for such advertising)

If you were testing the waters with this liberal garbage here in this forum, well read 'em and weap.

I'm sure you'll get a different response from your buddies over at the D.U.

 

[EWACampaign]

Baloney. That was NEVER the doctrine of the Constitution. The Constitution NEVER EVER dealt with relative "worth" of citizens. The Constitution simply states that we all have equal RIGHTS. The two concepts have nothing in common and ascribing the doctrine of "worth" is a both ignorant and false.



We're now going to dictate how I have to "relate to" other citizens? I don't think so. If this were in the Constitution, I would not be able to call you a worthless, slack-jawed, glassy-eyed, mouth-breathing, leftist half-wit. And I treasure that right far too much to give it up. People do NOT have the same relative worth. Worth is not something that the Constitution can confer on us. Worth is an earned attribute, not something given away or awarded by simple declaration. This is simply a grossly stupid attempt to codify the leftist philosophy of self-worth and "feel good about yourself". Well the conservative philosophy is to do something worthwhile and EARN the right to feel good about yourself.



So now everytime I utter something politically incorrect, you're going to invoke the Constitution and convict me of a hate crime. You leftist swine are thoroughly disgusting. This proposal is the most reprehensible piece of garbage I've ever read. It would essentially revoke the free speech rights of every American.


Now with one statement, you seek to trump every other aspect of the Constitution, override the concept of state's rights and impose your leftist philosophy on the rest of us. You fascist pig. You scream Bush is a nazi and then you come out with crap like this. Buster, you've accomplished something this morning. I don't usually get this graphic, but you piss me off to no end. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have fought and died in opposition to governments who would trample the rights of citizens in this manner. And now here you are seeking to do the same thing not with bullets but merely with the stroke of a pen. Rot in hell you scumbag.



We may both be human beings, but you are a total waste of my air and the sooner you get run over by a steamroller, the better.

Do you really think that the rest of us are unable to see that this is simply another leftist ploy to put homosexuals and other perverts into the mainstream? Not only that, but this garbage will eliminate the death penalty because the child molesting murderer in Florida is a human being and according to you, we are not "superior or inferior to one another".

Our "fundamental equality" is in the rights outlined in the Constitution. The Constitution makes no value judgement regarding the relative worth of one human being versus another. Your proposed amendment makes a total mockery of the Constitution. You seek to override other rights such as free speech with this crap amendment.

You are thoroughly disgusting. I would have dumped your entire piece of crap post for violating board rules, but I think that it is important for other members to see the enemies of the Constitution at work.

EWACampaign Reply

You are way off base. Before you go tooting your "it's my right to" horn, why wouldn't you consider a human rights amendment be adopted into the United States Constitution? That is one of the greatest things about being an America....the stand that the citizens of the United States take when it comes to human rights....but it is not, unfortunately, reflected in our own Constitution.

What is the purpose of the Equal Worth Amendment? Why have an Equal Worth Amendment in the Constitution of the United States of America? What are the implications of the Equal Worth Amendment? Why support the Equal Worth Amendment?

James P. Fitzgerald in The Maturing of America (1995) has initiated the dialogue that will ultimately result in “You and I along with our fellow citizens” answering these questions. The following is the “OVERVIEW” from The Maturing of America (Fitzgerald, 1995, pp. 2-5):


Many Americas are aware of and disturbed about social divisiveness. According to Rev. Richard Neuhaus, our nation is a “deeply confused and divided and conflicted community.” In the words of Charles Reich, “America is one vast, terrifying anti-community.” Some Americans are hostile mini-monarchs warring on the same battlefield rather than one people and a real community of persons living on the same homeland.

Many Americans are angry and are also fearful concerning the criminal and the non-criminal violence in our nation. They are saddened and confused about the lack of standards or principles. “Everything is relative.” It’s all about “freedom from” and “I can say and do anything I want” in accord with “me and my rights.” There is a crisis in views and valuing.

This social divisiveness includes all levels of society such as marriage, the family, school, the work community, congress, etc. This hostile behavior includes all hostile behavior such as bigoted speeches, doubletalk, stealing, child and spousal abuse, murder, non-living wages, “religious” righteousness, media violence and sex without redeeming value, health care fraud, not helping the helpless, vengeance, etc.

Many Americans are asking who they are and where they are going. They are turning here and there searching for some meaning and sense in themselves and their lives. They are wondering “what it’s all about?”

Many Americans feel negative, pessimistic, and even hopeless. They are looking for something positive—an optimistic vision with a plan. They want a challenge. They’re willing to contribute and play their role.

Who are these Americans? And what is America? And what are the future prospects of these Americans and of this America? And who or what is in control?

America is a nation. A nation is a society of persons living on a particular land. Thus, America is a human reality and a territorial reality.

As a human reality, America is many individual relational realities or persons relating to one another.

As relational realities, persons can relate to other persons in either one of two radically different kinds of fundamental relating with radically different consequences:

1. They can relate maturely and justly to other persons as persons and worths in themselves or ends, which they are. This kind of relating is unifying and peaceful relating with the inevitable consequences of constituting the persons themselves as a mature and just society of united persons in peaceful external behavior.

2. They can relate immaturely and unjustly to other persons as if things and mere worth to me or means, which they are not, and not as persons and worths in themselves or ends, which they are. This kind of relating is divisive and hostile relating with the inevitable consequences of constituting the persons themselves as an immature and unjust society of divided persons with hostile external behavior.

In a nation, the problems of social divisiveness and hostile behavior are secondary and symptomatic problems as consequences and evidence of the primary and underlying problem of immature and unjust relating. (It is not money but this kind of relating that is the root of all “evil.”)

A change in the consequences necessarily means and demands a change in the fundamental relating. The consequences of social divisiveness and hostile criminal and non-criminal external behavior can be replaced with social unity and peaceful external behavior only by replacing immature and unjust fundamental relating with mature and just fundamental relating. Not by social engineering as if persons were things or by a continuing multiplication of penal laws or in any other way.

If we, as a national society of persons, want to replace social divisiveness and hostile behavior with social unity and peaceful behavior, then we must make mature and just relating our national goal. We would then need a fundamental law that is the legal means of reaching this national goal.

As a society of law, a nation can have a fundamental law or constitution that supports the mature and just relating of persons along with its inevitable mature and just consequences or else one that supports the immature and unjust relating of persons along with its inevitable immature and unjust consequences.

Thus, a nation can have a mature and just constitution that contains a contract and covenant of the people concerning themselves and their mature and just relating to one another. Contrariwise, by commission or by omission a nation can have an immature and unjust constitution that does not have such a contract and covenant of the people.

Our current Constitution is unfinished. By omission it is an incomplete as well as immature and unjust Constitution that lacks a contract and covenant of the people concerning themselves and their mature and just relating to one another. Thence, by omission it supports immature and unjust relating along with its consequences of constituting persons as an immature and unjust society of divided persons with hostile external behavior.

This contract and covenant would include: The Basic Statement that all persons are basically equal worths in themselves unconditionally and unexceptionally, simply as persons and members of the human race. The Bill of Basic Civil and Human Rights about each person having the basic right to be related to maturely and justly as a worth in self by other persons along with the manifestation of this in external peaceful behavior; and The Bill of Basic Civil and Human Responsibilities about each person having the basic responsibility to relate to other persons maturely and justly as worths in themselves and to manifest this in external peaceful behavior. Thereby, our Constitution would be supporting our mature and just as well as unifying and peaceful relating to one another along with its consequences of constituting us as a mature and just society of united persons in peaceful external behavior.

Such a contract and covenant is not only about your relating to me as a worth in self, which is my being related to as such by you. It is also about you being related to as a worth in self by me, which is my relating to you as such. It is about all of us relating to one another as worths in ourselves, which is our being related to as such by one another, along with the consequential social unity and peaceful behavior.

Unfortunately, our current Constitution fails to state that you and I along with our fellow citizens are worths in ourselves, that you and I along with our fellow citizens have the basic right to be related to as worths in self along with the manifestation of this in external behavior, and that you and I along with our fellow citizens have the basic responsibility to relate to other persons as worths in themselves and to manifest this in external behavior. Thus, it fails to support our mature and just relating to one another along with its consequences of constituting us as a mature and just society of united persons in peaceful external behavior.

Yet, we the people are the government, the government of the people by the people for the people. You and I along with our fellow citizens. The Constitution is our Constitution. Yours and mine along with our fellow citizens’.

You and I along with our fellow citizens are responsible for who we are and for what kind of a fundamental law we have. We are in control, not the elected representative “government” and for many years not the inherited monarchical “government.” We can change our Constitution into a fundamental law that is a law of the people by the people for the people concerning themselves and their mature and just relating to one another.

If we really want to replace social divisiveness and hostile behavior with social unity and peaceful behavior, then we must make mature and just relating our national goal. If we really want to reach this goal along with its inevitable consequences of social unity and peaceful behavior, then we must make our Constitution a mature and just Constitution that is the legal means of reaching this existential goal. This would be the maturing of America --- the maturing of America legislatively and thence the maturing of America existentially.

We are in control. We are responsible. You and I along with our fellow citizens who are the government of this nation. We can choose this goal along with its consequences and we can choose to have the legal means of reaching this goal and thence its consequences. The choice is ours. Not only yours or only mine or only that of one or the other of our fellow citizens but yours and mine and also our fellow citizens’ individually and together.

Your choice is yours, just as my choice is mine and the choices of our fellow citizens are theirs. None of us can choose for others and none of us can avoid the inescapable responsibility of choosing. Our individual choices together make up our choice as the government we are individually and together.

Your choice can be a choice for this goal of mature and just relating along with social unity and peaceful behavior or a choice against this and for immature relating along with social divisiveness and hostile behavior.

Your choice can be a choice for this goal along with its consequences and for the legal means of reaching this goal along with its consequences. Or your choice can be a choice against this goal along with its consequences and against the legal means of reaching this goal along with its consequences.

Your choice can be a choice for the maturing of America or a choice against this and for the non-maturing of America.

Surely you favor this goal of mature and just relating along with its consequences of constituting us as a society of united persons in peaceful external behavior. Surely you favor a complete as well as mature and just Constitution as the legal means for achieving this existential goal and having its consequences.

Your choice for changing the Constitution into a mature and just Constitution as our contract and covenant concerning ourselves and our mature and just relating to one another is a choice for the maturing of America --- the maturing of America legislatively and thence the maturing of America existentially.

So, who are these Americans? What kind of a nation is this America --- legislatively and existentially? And who will answer? We will. You and I along with our fellow citizens. We are the government, the government of the people by the people for the people. And the law and the “government?” They are our law and our “government.”

 

[Avatar4321]

This is got to be one of the silliest proposals ive ever heard. You dont get worth by writing it into law. you get worth by working your butt off and doing good deeds. your actions determine your worth.

Many Americans are asking who they are and where they are going. They are turning here and there searching for some meaning and sense in themselves and their lives. They are wondering “what it’s all about?”

This may all be true. But amending the Constitution to add worthless words isnt going to change anything in society. If you really want to find meaning in your life than I can introduce you to a man. His name is Jesus Christ.

This is an interesting discussion though. It shows the clear dichotemy between Christ and the World. The World would try to change the environment to change men. As here this person is trying to amend the constitution to change people's behavior. That just isnt effective.

Christ on the other hand changes men who then change their environment. The world works on the outside in and Christ works on the inside out.

You want to change behavior, you need to focus on Good doctrine. Studying behavior doesnt change behavior, Studying doctrine does.

 

[007]

Your choice can be a choice for the maturing of America or a choice against this and for the non-maturing of America.

TRANSLATION:

You stupid, ignorant, bastard, conservatives that cling to God and morality are a bunch of cow tipping, backward, bull headed, stand-in-the-way-of-our-heathen-agenda, slip shods.

Oh yeah... I get it. I have to like butt fuckers and the like or I'm not "with it". I'm not "hip".

I've got one thing and one thing only to say to you people... "please leave my country"... GO TO FRANCE, they'll love you there.

 

[Merlin1047]

Well thanks for the cut and paste job from your propoganda site. I'm surprised you didn't send a brochure. Oh - never mind. I see you did.

Why did you post just another propoganda statement? Why won't you address specifically the points I raised? The answer to that is obvious. If you get into specifics, you will reveal yourself for the lying charlatan that you truly are.

You are way off base. Before you go tooting your "it's my right to" horn, why wouldn't you consider a human rights amendment be adopted into the United States Constitution?

No, I'm not off base. I've got your ass nailed dead to rights and you know it. But like most schemers, you think that you're so damn smart that no one else can see through your clever little plot. Then in the next sentence, you give yourself away. You obviously seem offended at my right to toot my "it's my right to" horn. Well, it IS my right, you stupid ass, whether you like it or not. This is not a human rights amendment, this is simply a bald-faced attempt by the proponents of homosexual causes to place themselves in a position where opposition to them and their deviant lifestyle will become illegal and punishable by law. This is not human rights you're concerned with, this is a suppresion of MY rights of free speech. And you seek to suppress the rights of all Americans simply to promote your perverted cause.

What is the purpose of the Equal Worth Amendment? Why have an Equal Worth Amendment in the Constitution of the United States of America? What are the implications of the Equal Worth Amendment? Why support the Equal Worth Amendment?

Several good questions there. Why don't you answer any of them? You tap-dance around with vague phrases but you never get right down to basics and make a flat, simple statement of purpose. So I'll do it for you. The purpose of this piece of shit is to control the actions and speech of all Americans. Its purpose is to make illegal any opposition to causes and people supported by scum like you. Its purpose is to remove the rights of Americans to disagree and instead homogenize (no pun intended) speech, thought and actions. It's purpose is to promote homosexual and other deviant lifestyle and to make any expression of opposition to these lifestyles illegal and punishable by law.

The fact that there are scum like you living in this country who care only for promoting their petty causes and care nothing for the rights protected by the Constitution is infuriating. I cannot begin to express the depth of my loathing for you and your "amendment".

Many Americans are angry and are also fearful concerning the criminal and the non-criminal violence in our nation. They are saddened and confused about the lack of standards or principles. “Everything is relative.” It’s all about “freedom from” and “I can say and do anything I want” in accord with “me and my rights.” There is a crisis in views and valuing.

This social divisiveness includes all levels of society such as marriage, the family, school, the work community, congress, etc. This hostile behavior includes all hostile behavior such as bigoted speeches, doubletalk, stealing, child and spousal abuse, murder, non-living wages, “religious” righteousness, media violence and sex without redeeming value, health care fraud, not helping the helpless, vengeance, etc.

And here you totally give yourself away. Apparently you cannot tolerate the fact that we Americans are free to express ourselves as we choose. THAT is the true purpose of your proposal. To make illegal any statements with which you disagree. You are a damn liar. You are the antithesis of everything the founding fathers and millions of Americans have fought and died for. And you would sell us all down the river simply to promote your homosexual protection act.

You obviously fear free speech, as indicated repeatedly in the second paragraph above. But you don't stop there, you want to control wages. You want to control media content. You want to make what you term "religious righteousness" illegal. And you want to create a socialist society by making "not helping the helpless" illegal.

HOW STUPID DO YOU THINK WE ARE? Or is it simply that you're such a total moron that you are unable to see the fallout of your idiotic and un-American proposal?

Who are these Americans? And what is America? And what are the future prospects of these Americans and of this America? And who or what is in control?

It is readily obvious that you have no clue regarding any of the questions you pose. You obviously think that Americans are a pack of sheep cowering in their homes waiting for you and your ilk to come along and tell them how to run their lives. As far as the future of America - well the future is a totalitarian state run by politically correct petty little dictators if your proposal is ever adopted. And I guess that answers the question of "who or what is in control" - because it's obvious that you think the thought police should be running the country.

In a nation, the problems of social divisiveness and hostile behavior are secondary and symptomatic problems as consequences and evidence of the primary and underlying problem of immature and unjust relating. (It is not money but this kind of relating that is the root of all “evil.”)

A change in the consequences necessarily means and demands a change in the fundamental relating. The consequences of social divisiveness and hostile criminal and non-criminal external behavior can be replaced with social unity and peaceful external behavior only by replacing immature and unjust fundamental relating with mature and just fundamental relating. Not by social engineering as if persons were things or by a continuing multiplication of penal laws or in any other way.

If we, as a national society of persons, want to replace social divisiveness and hostile behavior with social unity and peaceful behavior, then we must make mature and just relating our national goal. We would then need a fundamental law that is the legal means of reaching this national goal.

And once again you reveal yourself for the dictatorial pig that you are. You want to control the way Americans relate to each other. You seek to make disagreement with any cause you support punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. What's next - re-education camps? You have no idea how ridiculous your proposal truly is. I promise you this - if something like your proposal were ever adopted, there would be another shooting revolution in this country. And Skippy - I would make it my life's project to hunt your ass down.

You and people like you are the true danger to this nation. We will not tolerate scum like you who seek to subvert our freedoms in order to advance your petty causes.

Let me put a spin on an old joke. Assume that I was trapped in a room with someone like you and two terrorists. Further assume that I had a gun but only two bullets. Who would I shoot?

I'd shoot you.

Twice.

So, who are these Americans? What kind of a nation is this America --- legislatively and existentially? And who will answer? We will. You and I along with our fellow citizens. We are the government, the government of the people by the people for the people. And the law and the “government?” They are our law and our “government.”

Wrong, wrong and wrong again. America is a nation where freedom of speech is treasured above all else. America is a nation where people are smart enough to see through the machinations and plottings of petty little maggots like you. America is a nation where slimey conspirators like yourself will never gain traction so long as one true patriot still draws a breath.

So here's my answer to your questions and your proposal: :finger: :finger: :finger: :finger:

 

[Gunny]

TRANSLATION:

You stupid, ignorant, bastard, conservatives that cling to God and morality are a bunch of cow tipping, backward, bull headed, stand-in-the-way-of-our-heathen-agenda, slip shods.

Oh yeah... I get it. I have to like butt fuckers and the like or I'm not "with it". I'm not "hip".

I've got one thing and one thing only to say to you people... "please leave my country"... GO TO FRANCE, they'll love you there.

I've never seen EXACTLY what I was thinking put so eloquently.

So now that we are attaching a value to each of our lives, just where do the pedophiles fall because I'll be damned if even one of those scumsucking asshats is of equal value with the dogshit in my back yard.

 

[Avatar4321]

So now that we are attaching a value to each of our lives, just where do the pedophiles fall because I'll be damned if even one of those scumsucking asshats is of equal value with the dogshit in my back yard.

You value Dog crap that little? :teeth:

 

[Gunny]

Actually, dogshit has more worth. I just let the rain take care of it. Pedophiles deserve :bat:

 

[musicman]

Actually, dogshit has more worth. I just let the rain take care of it. Pedophiles deserve :bat:

That's PRECISELY what they deserve - and then they ought to be beaten with that same bat! :teeth:

 

[William Joyce]

I swear that EWACampaign is NOT ME just trying to draw you guys out!

 

[Merlin1047]

Hell, William, we knew that. Otherwise there would have been exclusionary clauses for some of your favorite folks.

 

[William Joyce]

:cof:

 

[musicman]

Ah - I knew this bullshit had a familiar ring to it! It reads like the Port Huron Statement - the dreary, ponderous liberal manifesto penned by Tom Hayden and his fellow spoiled, restless Marxist college pals pals in June, 1962. It was the beginning of sixties radicalism, whose cancerous effects America is trying desperately to shake off to this day. Blow it out your ass, Boris!

 

[musicman]

How stupid must Jane Fonda have felt, thinking that - in Hayden - she had hooked up with some kind of mover and shaker?! What an awful awakening that must have been - the morning she realized that she - JANE FONDA - had thrown in her lot with.....a city councilman! "Damn", I'll bet she thought, "I must have been wearing my NVA helmet a little TOO tight! I need to be screwing somebody SIGNIFICANT!"

 

[Merlin1047]

Ah - I knew this bullshit had a familiar ring to it! It reads like the Port Huron Statement - the dreary, ponderous liberal manifesto penned by Tom Hayden and his fellow spoiled, restless Marxist college pals in June, 1962. It was the beginning of sixties radicalism, whose cancerous effects America is trying desperately to shake off to this day. Blow it out your ass, Boris!

Wow. Good catch MM. I never would have made the connection - especially since I've never read that stuff.

 

[no1tovote4]

Way too vague... is the mechanic down the street who has had no long-term education of "equal worth" as a Doctor with 15 years of extended education and therefore due the same pay? This would take much of the incentive to achieve from individuals and leave us wanting for good doctors.

One of the things that have made this nation great is the way we incentivize higher thought, nobler achievements, and hard work. To assume that all are of the same worth and thereby create a basic standard of pay is to take away one of the main reasons that this country has worked so well and why we remain today "the richest nation on earth".

 

[007]

Way too vague... is the mechanic down the street who has had no long-term education of "equal worth" as a Doctor with 15 years of extended education and therefore due the same pay? This would take much of the incentive to achieve from individuals and leave us wanting for good doctors.

One of the things that have made this nation great is the way we incentivize higher thought, nobler achievements, and hard work. To assume that all are of the same worth and thereby create a basic standard of pay is to take away one of the main reasons that this country has worked so well and why we remain today "the richest nation on earth".

Ah... well... if wal mart has their way, china will be the richest nation on earth, in the very near future.

 

[no1tovote4]

Ah... well... if wal mart has their way, china will be the richest nation on earth, in the very near future.

The only way that they will reach that is if they too incentivize ownership and greater achievements. They are beginning. I have no problem allowing other countries into the whole riches thing, the only problem is they have to realize that each time they take a personal responsibility from individuals they take some of that incentive that makes western culture so successful.

 

[Zhukov]

People are not equal.

People should be treated equally before the law.

I don't have time to read this whole thread right now, but that distinction is not clear in the proposed ammendment and so I do not support it.

Seems to me I could apply for a job for which I am wholly unqualified for and then invoke the EWA were I not hired.