How far should we change the Constitution?

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Yet the same people who are so adamant about property rights in this particular case oppose the right of WalMart to build stores on property they own. They are also quite willing to take private property from other poor people and give it to rich people.

By the way, this is not a first amendment issue, but feel free to continue talking and proving you have no idea what you are talking about.

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.

Here you have totally lost me, what the fuck do you think you are talking about? If you had used a 4th Amendment argument to support the right of Park51 to develop their property you would have at least got the right amendment. Is someone trying to stop Hispanics from building on their property?

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.

Open to debate from whom? In order to make it retroactive it would be necessary to to do more than amend the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

The interesting thing is that current case law can make a solid argument that anchor babies are not natural born citizens it we did not make it common practice to automatically grant them citizenship. In other words, it might not actually be necessary to amend the Constitution to stop granting anchor babies citizenship because federal law already states that children who are born in the US are not citizens if the parents are part of a diplomatic mission. The key phrase is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," and if we revised federal law to redefine who is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to exclude children whose parents are here illegally, or even if the parents are here on temporary visas, it might just be constitutional.

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.

Why would we need this? there is already a federal law, fully supported by Obama, that essentially accomplishes this. Why go to the extra effort of making a Constitutional amendment?

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?

Funny, every draft of a Balanced Budget Amendment clearly makes an exception for declared wars and other emergencies. Yet you, as always, want to discuss something that no one outside of your imaginary world is even proposing.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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

This cannot be right. Are you trying to tell me that rdean is not towing the Democratic party line here? That he actually disagrees with them about the need to change the Constitution?

He must be drunk.

 

[Dante]

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

...

Are there other areas not mentioned that we should consider?

How about we go back to our glorious roots. Only white men of property...get to vote. Or something like that?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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".

Do you have a problem with non Muslims being denied the right to build whatever they want on privately owned property? If not, you are a hypocrite.

 

[manu1959]

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".

what if you could proove the church was going to be used for terrorist recruiting funding and training.....would you let it be built then....

 

[del]

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?

no one has ever suggested that the change in the 14th should be made retroactive. that's probably because intelligent people under stand that ex post facto laws are....................wait for it.........





wait





wait








wait


unconstitutional

fuckwit

 

[Dante]

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?

no one has ever suggested that the change in the 14th should be made retroactive. that's probably because intelligent people under stand that ex post facto laws are....................wait for it.........





wait





wait








wait


unconstitutional

fuckwit

 

[nraforlife]

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?

actually the current Constitution as written will support ALL of those goals IF a few corrupt judges are impeached.

 

[CountofTuscany]

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.

I see nothing wrong with redefining a previous change.

 

[xotoxi]

How far should we change the Constitution?

I would advocate that the entire Constitution be translated into Esperanto...so that everyone in the world would be able to read it.

 

[Bern80]

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.

You mean advanced to your socialist progressivism, more taxes and less freedom? Thanks, I'll pass.

 

[Bern80]

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?)

I don't get it. Are people just getting dumber. Do we just not teach the constitution in schools any more, or basic english for that matter? Because if you understand the later and how the document was written I really don't see what is so unclear about it or what needs to be modernized.

The problem I have with conveneing a re-write of the document is that it is almost garunteed to be far more complicated than it is now. It's simplicity and generally speaking timelessness are two of the best things about the document. Considering most other countries have more socialistic governments than we do, a re-write would almost assuredly end up with a less free society than we have now. Translation: less free.

 

[del]

How far should we change the Constitution?

I would advocate that the entire Constitution be translated into Esperanto...so that everyone in the world would be able to read it.

mi malkonsenti.

malsprita hipostazo.

 

[xotoxi]

How far should we change the Constitution?

I would advocate that the entire Constitution be translated into Esperanto...so that everyone in the world would be able to read it.

mi malkonsenti.

malsprita hipostazo.

You're in America, muchacho.

Speak fucking ENGLISH!

 

[Big Black Dog]

Actually, the Constitution is a perfect document except for one thing. It needs to be changed so that I am King.

 

[jeffrockit]

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 is a complete mischaracterization of the issue. Most Americans know Muslims have a "Right" to build the Mosque on that location. Most Americans believe that it is in bad taste and offensive to build it so close to ground zero.
If Muslims truly want to help America heal after 911, they would do the honorable thing and find another location as continuing with this plan will only deepen the divide. NYC has over 300 mosques so clearly building another one is not the issue.

 

[George Costanza]

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

How so? No more Due Process of Law requrement for individual states? States should be free to do whatever the hell they want?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

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) I have not seen anyone claiming they do not have the right to build on that property. What I am hearing is people using that very same first ammendment to voice their dislike for the decision. Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you should always do it.

2) Do you actually have an example to back up this claim?

3) The 14th ammendment was not meant for children of illegal immigrants but instead was intended to protect the children of freed slaves. Here is some reasearch for you so you can better understand this The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - interpretations and misinterpretations - US Constitution

4) I feel the marriage "Benefit" in taxes is unconstitutional as it does not appropriate taxes in a uniform manner. I think we should let gay people get married and not give people a tax benefit for being married as that discriminates against single individuals.

5) I dont think we should add more to the constitution although I do agree with the budgets needing to be balanced. As you said "no more money for universal health care/wars/entitlements until they balanced the budget" is a great idea but I think we can enforce it with our votes instead of adding another ammendment to the constitution.