What an Effort! A worthy one too. I see the intent as positive. A couple of things however. 1. The correct definition of the root meaning of the word “idiot” is not published and implications of true meanings not understood. 2. Written history is heavily censored and revised making the natural law (DNA) aspects as well as origins fairly well unknown, and not effectively denied. Needless to say, consideration of the 9th Amendment shows that the people, at any given time can define rights retained but not enumerated. How that is done is not taught in schools. Lincoln was trying to use a version of it to stop the civil war, but newspapers would not publish his speeches in big cities. Firstly it is only done through formal, lawful majorities in states. Then a supermajority of states at Article V. Ummm, anyone ever consider preparation for Article V as a retained right? Why would the constitution not retain that right to see people using it to control tyranny, adapt, evolve?