Let’s Give Up on the Constitution

[progressive hunter]

"AS the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions."

snip....

"This is not to say that we should disobey all constitutional commands. Freedom of speech and religion, equal protection of the laws and protections against governmental deprivation of life, liberty or property are important, whether or not they are in the Constitution. We should continue to follow those requirements out of respect, not obligation."

snip....

"If even this change is impossible, perhaps the dream of a country ruled by “We the people” is impossibly utopian. If so, we have to give up on the claim that we are a self-governing people who can settle our disagreements through mature and tolerant debate. But before abandoning our heritage of self-government, we ought to try extricating ourselves from constitutional bondage so that we can give real freedom a chance."

Opinion | Let’s Give Up on the Constitution

Older piece but still relevant. Don't like the rules?
Change them.

The consitution has ways "out" built in, The amendment process, either via the legislature/states or the States themselves via Article 5 Conventions.

I know how it works, I'm a strict Constitutionalist. The Left screams get rid of it every time they lose an election.

“Strict constitutionalist” is the same rightwing idiocy as “originalism”; just as failed and just as wrongheaded.

It was the original understanding and intent of the Framers that the courts determine the meaning of the Constitution – the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the Supreme Court.

“But that’s not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant ‘argument.’

I see case law clayton is still spewing his progressive bullshit,, sorry dude that was never the intent of the founders

 

[Marion Morrison]

"AS the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions."

snip....

"This is not to say that we should disobey all constitutional commands. Freedom of speech and religion, equal protection of the laws and protections against governmental deprivation of life, liberty or property are important, whether or not they are in the Constitution. We should continue to follow those requirements out of respect, not obligation."

snip....

"If even this change is impossible, perhaps the dream of a country ruled by “We the people” is impossibly utopian. If so, we have to give up on the claim that we are a self-governing people who can settle our disagreements through mature and tolerant debate. But before abandoning our heritage of self-government, we ought to try extricating ourselves from constitutional bondage so that we can give real freedom a chance."

Opinion | Let’s Give Up on the Constitution

Older piece but still relevant. Don't like the rules?
Change them.

You're free to give up on the Constitution if you so choose. Renounce your citizenship and move to Somalia.

There's no Constitution to trouble you there.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Enforce the Constitution, jail or deportation for those who can't follow it.

McConnell is ignoring his constitutional obligation to fund the govt. When does he go?

No he isn't. He is waiting for a budget that meets with presidential approval. Democrats on the other hand have consistently NOT funded the government and forced continuing resolutions.

" Waiting for presidential approval" is not the process. Allowing the govt to shutdown over politics is a-constitutional.

The House has done nothing but vote to fund the govt, fool. They aren't making any demands. They've met their constitutional obligation.

 

[danielpalos]

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Why does the right wing have a problem with it?

That would be the liberals. They seem Hell bent on taking rights away from people. In many cases through the media. Take the Catholic kids from this week as an example. They were peaceably assembled for a lawful purpose and were attacked by two groups.

not sure what you mean. it seemed more like some junior disrespecting his elders.

 

[jillian]

"AS the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions."

snip....

"This is not to say that we should disobey all constitutional commands. Freedom of speech and religion, equal protection of the laws and protections against governmental deprivation of life, liberty or property are important, whether or not they are in the Constitution. We should continue to follow those requirements out of respect, not obligation."

snip....

"If even this change is impossible, perhaps the dream of a country ruled by “We the people” is impossibly utopian. If so, we have to give up on the claim that we are a self-governing people who can settle our disagreements through mature and tolerant debate. But before abandoning our heritage of self-government, we ought to try extricating ourselves from constitutional bondage so that we can give real freedom a chance."

Opinion | Let’s Give Up on the Constitution

Older piece but still relevant. Don't like the rules?
Change them.

The consitution has ways "out" built in, The amendment process, either via the legislature/states or the States themselves via Article 5 Conventions.

Communists don't care.

If only you knew what a communist is

 

[saveliberty]

Pot smokers are violating federal ans in many cases state law, that has nothing to do with the Constitution, they are jailed under laws.

They needed an amendment to ban Alcohol sales nationwide. Furthermore their first attempt to ban it nation wide, using taxes, was eventually ruled unconstitutional. But by then Congress and the Federal Governement had expanded its power over the States and its US subjects........

We don't have subjects in the US. Try using citizens next time.

 

[Marion Morrison]

"AS the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions."

snip....

"This is not to say that we should disobey all constitutional commands. Freedom of speech and religion, equal protection of the laws and protections against governmental deprivation of life, liberty or property are important, whether or not they are in the Constitution. We should continue to follow those requirements out of respect, not obligation."

snip....

"If even this change is impossible, perhaps the dream of a country ruled by “We the people” is impossibly utopian. If so, we have to give up on the claim that we are a self-governing people who can settle our disagreements through mature and tolerant debate. But before abandoning our heritage of self-government, we ought to try extricating ourselves from constitutional bondage so that we can give real freedom a chance."

Opinion | Let’s Give Up on the Constitution

Older piece but still relevant. Don't like the rules?
Change them.

The consitution has ways "out" built in, The amendment process, either via the legislature/states or the States themselves via Article 5 Conventions.

Communists don't care.

If only you knew what a communist is

You are, but you're too much of a useful idiot to realize it.

 

[saveliberty]

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Why does the right wing have a problem with it?

That would be the liberals. They seem Hell bent on taking rights away from people. In many cases through the media. Take the Catholic kids from this week as an example. They were peaceably assembled for a lawful purpose and were attacked by two groups.

not sure what you mean. it seemed more like some junior disrespecting his elders.

Keep up with the news moron. The kids were innocent it is all over the news today.

 

[danielpalos]

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Why does the right wing have a problem with it?

That would be the liberals. They seem Hell bent on taking rights away from people. In many cases through the media. Take the Catholic kids from this week as an example. They were peaceably assembled for a lawful purpose and were attacked by two groups.

not sure what you mean. it seemed more like some junior disrespecting his elders.

Keep up with the news moron. The kids were innocent it is all over the news today.

innocent of what?

 

[saveliberty]

Enforce the Constitution, jail or deportation for those who can't follow it.

McConnell is ignoring his constitutional obligation to fund the govt. When does he go?

No he isn't. He is waiting for a budget that meets with presidential approval. Democrats on the other hand have consistently NOT funded the government and forced continuing resolutions.

" Waiting for presidential approval" is not the process. Allowing the govt to shutdown over politics is a-constitutional.

The House has done nothing but vote to fund the govt, fool. They aren't making any demands. They've met their constitutional obligation.

So you want Congress to meet and go through "the process" knowing the president will veto. Brilliant

Show me where a government shutdown is unconstitutional. Go ahead, cite an article.

 

[saveliberty]

innocent of what?

Go and read it for yourself moron. If only your playing stupid were just that...

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Enforce the Constitution, jail or deportation for those who can't follow it.

McConnell is ignoring his constitutional obligation to fund the govt. When does he go?

No he isn't. He is waiting for a budget that meets with presidential approval. Democrats on the other hand have consistently NOT funded the government and forced continuing resolutions.

" Waiting for presidential approval" is not the process. Allowing the govt to shutdown over politics is a-constitutional.

The House has done nothing but vote to fund the govt, fool. They aren't making any demands. They've met their constitutional obligation.

So you want Congress to meet and go through "the process" knowing the president will veto. Brilliant

Show me where a government shutdown is unconstitutional. Go ahead, cite an article.

That's the job, dope. They don't work for the president. Co-equal branch and all. The very fact that the govt is not funded is unconstitutional.

 

[saveliberty]

That's the job, dope. They don't work for the president. Co-equal branch and all.

So you can't cite an article, thanks for playing idiot.

 

[EasyPeasy]

We already have.

 

[saveliberty]

We already have.

A bowel movement report is not necessary.

 

[BlindBoo]

Pot smokers are violating federal ans in many cases state law, that has nothing to do with the Constitution, they are jailed under laws.

They needed an amendment to ban Alcohol sales nationwide. Furthermore their first attempt to ban it nation wide, using taxes, was eventually ruled unconstitutional. But by then Congress and the Federal Governement had expanded its power over the States and its US subjects........

We don't have subjects in the US. Try using citizens next time.

By usurping the Constitution in this matter they further reduce our freedom to one of being a subject, a number, a mere revenue stream.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That's the job, dope. They don't work for the president. Co-equal branch and all.

So you can't cite an article, thanks for playing idiot.

I shouldn't have to for something so basic.
It's the conservatives who continually erode constitutional norms and their followers who can't see it.

 

[anynameyouwish]

look, dumbass, YOU are the one who SPECIFICALLY STATED "Enforce the Constitution, jail or deportation for those who can't follow it"

and I am merely trying to understand what you actually mean.

the baker who refused to bake
the people demanding he bake a cake


who do you arrest and jail?

pot smokers?
the dea?

who is NOT abiding by the constitution?

can you give even one example of this thing that seems so important to you?

Hey triggered dumbass, Your example was not a Constitutional violation in the prior situation. The same holds true for the baker case. The baker was upholding his religious beliefs in a well established religion. The cake buyers wanted a cake and were denied, no harm no foul. Pot smokers are violating federal ans in many cases state law, that has nothing to do with the Constitution, they are jailed under laws. The DEA is a government established agency. Again your examples are stupid. Stop acting stupid.

so we have a constitution to protect our rights and freedoms but we can just make up laws that COUNTER those rights and freedoms and that is ok with you?


I can shout "America is the greatest because we have rights and freedoms!"

and really really mean it and believe it!

and then I can start making lists of things that nobody should have the freedom to do.


Are YOU a conservative?

Are laws against tobacco unconstitutional?
isn't that anti-freedom?

 

[saveliberty]

By usurping the Constitution in this matter they further reduce our freedom to one of being a subject, a number, a mere revenue stream.

Just what freedoms are you being denied? So you only have the freedom to be a subject now, how utterly wrong and alarmist.

 

[saveliberty]

I shouldn't have to for something so basic.
It's the conservatives who continually erode constitutional norms and their followers who can't see it.

No, you simply can't do it. Take a look around, it is the liberals who are the aggressors.