How far should we change the Constitution?

[rdean]

Currently, many Americans seem eager to make changes to the US Constitution.

1. The First Amendment:

Many Americans feel that a Muslim Religious Center should not be allowed to be built so close to Ground Zero. In spite of the fact that it’s correctly “zoned” and would be built on “private property”.
Newt Gingrich compares this with posting the Nazi symbol next to the Holocaust Museum.

2. The Fourth Amendment:

Many Americans feel it’s “justified” changing the wording against “search and seizure” as long as it’s directed at “illegal aliens”. Many opposed see that as “targeting” Hispanics.

3. The Fourteenth Amendment:

Many Americans feel if your parents are in this country illegally, then, even if you were born here, you shouldn’t automatically be a citizen. Whether this would be retroactive is open for debate.

4. A Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage.

It’s estimated the gay population is between 3 and 5% of the total US population. Even though only a very few of that tiny percentage even want to get married, many Americans feel that allowing those few this “honor” would delegitimize and desanctify the 50% of marriages that don’t end in divorce, rending them meaningless and the future of heterosexual marriage is at stake.

5. A Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget.

That is self explanatory. It would mean, “no money for war unless something else is cut”.

Are there other areas not mentioned that we should consider?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Currently, many Americans seem eager to make changes to the US Constitution.

1. The First Amendment:

Many Americans feel that a Muslim Religious Center should not be allowed to be built so close to Ground Zero. In spite of the fact that it’s correctly “zoned” and would be built on “private property”.
Newt Gingrich compares this with posting the Nazi symbol next to the Holocaust Museum.

2. The Fourth Amendment:

Many Americans feel it’s “justified” changing the wording against “search and seizure” as long as it’s directed at “illegal aliens”. Many opposed see that as “targeting” Hispanics.

3. The Fourteenth Amendment:

Many Americans feel if your parents are in this country illegally, then, even if you were born here, you shouldn’t automatically be a citizen. Whether this would be retroactive is open for debate.

4. A Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage.

It’s estimated the gay population is between 3 and 5% of the total US population. Even though only a very few of that tiny percentage even want to get married, many Americans feel that allowing those few this “honor” would delegitimize and desanctify the 50% of marriages that don’t end in divorce, rending them meaningless and the future of heterosexual marriage is at stake.

5. A Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget.

That is self explanatory. It would mean, “no money for war unless something else is cut”.

Are there other areas not mentioned that we should consider?

1, 2)I have heard of no such attempts to amend the first or fourth amendments.

3)However the 14th amendment does need to be looked at concerning "anchor babies".

4)Marriage is a states rights issue and should remain so.

5)Every states constitution has a "balanced budget amendment excluding Vermont. The amendment proposed to the US Constitution excludes money for wartime or national emergencies and should be considered for ratification.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I would like to see the word people replaced with the words citizen or legal resident

That would solve a lot of problems.

 

[chanel]

This is a bit dated ('08) but:

Nearly twice as many Republicans (62%) rate the document as excellent, while only 32% of Democrats feel that way. Fifty-three percent (53%) of unaffiliated voters give the Constitution highest marks. Sixty-one percent (61%) of conservatives rate the Constitution as Excellent, a view shared by just 39% of liberals.

African-American voters are more supportive of changing the Constitution, with 23% calling for major changes. Just 3% of white voters support major changes.

Democrats favor minor revisions to the Constitution far more than Republican voters—51% of Barack Obama’s party say that either minor (41%) or major (10%) changes are needed. Just 23% of Republicans see the need for even minor changes. Overall, 76% of Republicans say the document is fine as is. Forty-seven percent (47%) of Democrats agree.

59% of voters say Constitution is Just Fine; 39% Say it Doesn?t Restrict Government Enough - Rasmussen Reports

 

[johnrocks]

Good post and I'd add the 2nd in there, many;although it's not a "front burner" issue right now; want to deny that right to Americans, others seems unconcerned with private property rights, others talk about the 10th yet ignore it's often ignored sibling;the 9th.

This Republic shit canned the Constitution generations ago.

 

[Yukon.]

Your constitution is outdated and is destroying your country. It should be put on hold, a team of legal experts should be assembled for the purpose of bringing it into the 21st Century. If this is not done soon your country will die.

 

[CountofTuscany]

The 14th amendmant needs to be changed. After all it is a change itself.

 

[CountofTuscany]

Currently, many Americans seem eager to make changes to the US Constitution.

1. The First Amendment:

Many Americans feel that a Muslim Religious Center should not be allowed to be built so close to Ground Zero. In spite of the fact that it’s correctly “zoned” and would be built on “private property”.
Newt Gingrich compares this with posting the Nazi symbol next to the Holocaust Museum.

2. The Fourth Amendment:

Many Americans feel it’s “justified” changing the wording against “search and seizure” as long as it’s directed at “illegal aliens”. Many opposed see that as “targeting” Hispanics.

3. The Fourteenth Amendment:

Many Americans feel if your parents are in this country illegally, then, even if you were born here, you shouldn’t automatically be a citizen. Whether this would be retroactive is open for debate.

4. A Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage.

It’s estimated the gay population is between 3 and 5% of the total US population. Even though only a very few of that tiny percentage even want to get married, many Americans feel that allowing those few this “honor” would delegitimize and desanctify the 50% of marriages that don’t end in divorce, rending them meaningless and the future of heterosexual marriage is at stake.

5. A Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget.

That is self explanatory. It would mean, “no money for war unless something else is cut”.

Are there other areas not mentioned that we should consider?

Proposed changes 1 through 4 all fit into the conservative political agenda. Not sure about the 5th one - seems pretty vague.

Doesn't matter - we don't need to "change the Constitution" in any way or for any reason.

The cons have been squealing like stuck pigs ever since President Obama was sworn in as President of the United States. The squealing just gets louder with each passing month. Get over it, cons - no one is going to drag you from your homes and kill you. The sun will rise tomorrow morning and the morning after that. Life will go on - and probably much for the better, even though you don't think so.

The Constitution has been changed many times. That is what every amendmant represents. A change.

 

[Yukon.]

Didnt you have an amendment at one time that stated the Negro wasnt completely human?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Didnt you have an amendment at one time that stated the Negro wasnt completely human?

No

 

[zzzz]

It is time to convene a Constitutional Convention as specified in the Constitution. If enough state legislatures can be persuaded to pass resolutions we can bypass Congress and rewrite the Constitution to fit the 21st century. We can change the term “people” to “citizen”, make it in plain English (Make English the required language too) that people can own weapons ( sorry GUNS), babies born in the US not to US citizens are aliens, abolish political parties, change the presidential election to a popular vote and get rid of the electoral college, and many other things. Once a convention is called the whole constitution is open to change. All I hear is what is wrong with the Constitution and the US Supreme Court rulings, so let’s change it and make it in plain English.

 

[bodecea]

Didnt you have an amendment at one time that stated the Negro wasnt completely human?

There was a supreme court case that said negros weren't citizens, and had no rights....even if they were freemen. Dred Scot.

 

[rdean]

Currently, many Americans seem eager to make changes to the US Constitution.

1. The First Amendment:

Many Americans feel that a Muslim Religious Center should not be allowed to be built so close to Ground Zero. In spite of the fact that it’s correctly “zoned” and would be built on “private property”.
Newt Gingrich compares this with posting the Nazi symbol next to the Holocaust Museum.

2. The Fourth Amendment:

Many Americans feel it’s “justified” changing the wording against “search and seizure” as long as it’s directed at “illegal aliens”. Many opposed see that as “targeting” Hispanics.

3. The Fourteenth Amendment:

Many Americans feel if your parents are in this country illegally, then, even if you were born here, you shouldn’t automatically be a citizen. Whether this would be retroactive is open for debate.

4. A Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage.

It’s estimated the gay population is between 3 and 5% of the total US population. Even though only a very few of that tiny percentage even want to get married, many Americans feel that allowing those few this “honor” would delegitimize and desanctify the 50% of marriages that don’t end in divorce, rending them meaningless and the future of heterosexual marriage is at stake.

5. A Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget.

That is self explanatory. It would mean, “no money for war unless something else is cut”.

Are there other areas not mentioned that we should consider?

Proposed changes 1 through 4 all fit into the conservative political agenda. Not sure about the 5th one - seems pretty vague.

Doesn't matter - we don't need to "change the Constitution" in any way or for any reason.

The cons have been squealing like stuck pigs ever since President Obama was sworn in as President of the United States. The squealing just gets louder with each passing month. Get over it, cons - no one is going to drag you from your homes and kill you. The sun will rise tomorrow morning and the morning after that. Life will go on - and probably much for the better, even though you don't think so.

The Constitution has been changed many times. That is what every amendmant represents. A change.

Or a clarification.

Or a refinement.

 

[rdean]

Currently, many Americans seem eager to make changes to the US Constitution.

1. The First Amendment:

Many Americans feel that a Muslim Religious Center should not be allowed to be built so close to Ground Zero. In spite of the fact that it’s correctly “zoned” and would be built on “private property”.
Newt Gingrich compares this with posting the Nazi symbol next to the Holocaust Museum.

2. The Fourth Amendment:

Many Americans feel it’s “justified” changing the wording against “search and seizure” as long as it’s directed at “illegal aliens”. Many opposed see that as “targeting” Hispanics.

3. The Fourteenth Amendment:

Many Americans feel if your parents are in this country illegally, then, even if you were born here, you shouldn’t automatically be a citizen. Whether this would be retroactive is open for debate.

4. A Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage.

It’s estimated the gay population is between 3 and 5% of the total US population. Even though only a very few of that tiny percentage even want to get married, many Americans feel that allowing those few this “honor” would delegitimize and desanctify the 50% of marriages that don’t end in divorce, rending them meaningless and the future of heterosexual marriage is at stake.

5. A Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget.

That is self explanatory. It would mean, “no money for war unless something else is cut”.

Are there other areas not mentioned that we should consider?

1, 2)I have heard of no such attempts to amend the first or fourth amendments.

3)However the 14th amendment does need to be looked at concerning "anchor babies".

4)Marriage is a states rights issue and should remain so.

5)Every states constitution has a "balanced budget amendment excluding Vermont. The amendment proposed to the US Constitution excludes money for wartime or national emergencies and should be considered for ratification.

Denying Muslims the right to build a Mosque on privately owned land properly "zoned" would be a clear violation of Free Speech as well and an infringement on "religious rights".

The Arizona law aimed at Hispanics requiring arrest based on "suspicion" is a clear violation of "search and seizure".

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Didnt you have an amendment at one time that stated the Negro wasnt completely human?

There was a supreme court case that said negros weren't citizens, and had no rights....even if they were freemen. Dred Scot.

So now we don't like SCOTUS decisions? Can you make up your mind?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Didnt you have an amendment at one time that stated the Negro wasnt completely human?

There was a supreme court case that said negros weren't citizens, and had no rights....even if they were freemen. Dred Scot.

Hey stupid, the question wasn't about whether negros had citizenship and it wasn't about any Supreme Court case. It was about whether a Constitution amendment deemed negros as not being human.

Your stupidity never ceases.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Currently, many Americans seem eager to make changes to the US Constitution.

1. The First Amendment:

Many Americans feel that a Muslim Religious Center should not be allowed to be built so close to Ground Zero. In spite of the fact that it’s correctly “zoned” and would be built on “private property”.
Newt Gingrich compares this with posting the Nazi symbol next to the Holocaust Museum.

2. The Fourth Amendment:

Many Americans feel it’s “justified” changing the wording against “search and seizure” as long as it’s directed at “illegal aliens”. Many opposed see that as “targeting” Hispanics.

3. The Fourteenth Amendment:

Many Americans feel if your parents are in this country illegally, then, even if you were born here, you shouldn’t automatically be a citizen. Whether this would be retroactive is open for debate.

4. A Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage.

It’s estimated the gay population is between 3 and 5% of the total US population. Even though only a very few of that tiny percentage even want to get married, many Americans feel that allowing those few this “honor” would delegitimize and desanctify the 50% of marriages that don’t end in divorce, rending them meaningless and the future of heterosexual marriage is at stake.

5. A Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget.

That is self explanatory. It would mean, “no money for war unless something else is cut”.

Are there other areas not mentioned that we should consider?

1, 2)I have heard of no such attempts to amend the first or fourth amendments.

3)However the 14th amendment does need to be looked at concerning "anchor babies".

4)Marriage is a states rights issue and should remain so.

5)Every states constitution has a "balanced budget amendment excluding Vermont. The amendment proposed to the US Constitution excludes money for wartime or national emergencies and should be considered for ratification.

Denying Muslims the right to build a Mosque on privately owned land properly "zoned" would be a clear violation of Free Speech as well and an infringement on "religious rights".

The Arizona law aimed at Hispanics requiring arrest based on "suspicion" is a clear violation of "search and seizure".

That's all you got ? Strawman arguments?

Have you read the federal immigration laws? Here's a sampling:


TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part IX > § 1357

§ 1357. Powers of immigration officers and employees

(a) Powers without warrant
Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant—
(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;

United States Code: Title 8,1357. Powers of immigration officers and employees | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[rdean]

1, 2)I have heard of no such attempts to amend the first or fourth amendments.

3)However the 14th amendment does need to be looked at concerning "anchor babies".

4)Marriage is a states rights issue and should remain so.

5)Every states constitution has a "balanced budget amendment excluding Vermont. The amendment proposed to the US Constitution excludes money for wartime or national emergencies and should be considered for ratification.

Denying Muslims the right to build a Mosque on privately owned land properly "zoned" would be a clear violation of Free Speech as well and an infringement on "religious rights".

The Arizona law aimed at Hispanics requiring arrest based on "suspicion" is a clear violation of "search and seizure".

That's all you got ? Strawman arguments?

Have you read the federal immigration laws? Here's a sampling:


TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part IX > § 1357

§ 1357. Powers of immigration officers and employees

(a) Powers without warrant
Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant—
(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;

United States Code: Title 8,1357. Powers of immigration officers and employees | LII / Legal Information Institute

Targeting Hispanics based on suspicion is a far cry from, "alien or person believed to be an alien".

I'm not defending it, I'm just pointing it out.

When I was a kid in California in the sixties, a "no-knock" law was passed that lasted abut a day.

You could call up the police and report that you saw someone smoking pot and they would rush into the house without a warrant to arrest the person without a warrant.

So they target this house that had several reports. They rush in and throw this man an his terrified and crying son against the wall. They bring out the man's daughter and wife who were in the back of the house doing each others hair.

They guy they targeted turned out to be someone "important".

The next day, the law was found to be unconstitutional.

 

[rikules]

Currently, many Americans seem eager to make changes to the US Constitution.

1. The First Amendment:

Many Americans feel that a Muslim Religious Center should not be allowed to be built so close to Ground Zero. In spite of the fact that it’s correctly “zoned” and would be built on “private property”.
Newt Gingrich compares this with posting the Nazi symbol next to the Holocaust Museum.

2. The Fourth Amendment:

Many Americans feel it’s “justified” changing the wording against “search and seizure” as long as it’s directed at “illegal aliens”. Many opposed see that as “targeting” Hispanics.

3. The Fourteenth Amendment:

Many Americans feel if your parents are in this country illegally, then, even if you were born here, you shouldn’t automatically be a citizen. Whether this would be retroactive is open for debate.

4. A Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage.

It’s estimated the gay population is between 3 and 5% of the total US population. Even though only a very few of that tiny percentage even want to get married, many Americans feel that allowing those few this “honor” would delegitimize and desanctify the 50% of marriages that don’t end in divorce, rending them meaningless and the future of heterosexual marriage is at stake.

5. A Constitutional Amendment to balance the budget.

That is self explanatory. It would mean, “no money for war unless something else is cut”.

Are there other areas not mentioned that we should consider?

since the current constitution is either very vague on issues or doesn't address (many) issues at all, leaving it open to argument, never ending debates and questionable conclusions reached due to ignorance, bias, fears and hatreds I, personally, would have no problem with a NEW CONSTITUTION that is
a. more specific
and
2. renewable every (20 years? 30 years? generation?)

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Denying Muslims the right to build a Mosque on privately owned land properly "zoned" would be a clear violation of Free Speech as well and an infringement on "religious rights".

The Arizona law aimed at Hispanics requiring arrest based on "suspicion" is a clear violation of "search and seizure".

That's all you got ? Strawman arguments?

Have you read the federal immigration laws? Here's a sampling:


TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part IX > § 1357

§ 1357. Powers of immigration officers and employees

(a) Powers without warrant
Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant—
(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;

United States Code: Title 8,1357. Powers of immigration officers and employees | LII / Legal Information Institute

Targeting Hispanics based on suspicion is a far cry from, "alien or person believed to be an alien".

I'm not defending it, I'm just pointing it out.

When I was a kid in California in the sixties, a "no-knock" law was passed that lasted abut a day.

You could call up the police and report that you saw someone smoking pot and they would rush into the house without a warrant to arrest the person without a warrant.

So they target this house that had several reports. They rush in and throw this man an his terrified and crying son against the wall. They bring out the man's daughter and wife who were in hate back doing each others hair.

They guy they targeted turned out to be someone "important".

The next day, the law was found to be unconstitutional.

Semantics? You really want to argue over semantics?

Since you can't win the one argument you started, you create a strawman.

You fail on mulitple levels.