Posted on 06/18/2016 11:08:48 AM PDT by Da Bilge Troll
It’s an open question whether states really have the moxie required to come up with a better formulation. Phyllis may be right on practical grounds rather than theoretical ones.
As C. S. Lewis put it, those who twisted under the old system will twist under the new one as well. Giving up a lot of stuff that they have been accustomed to getting from an Uncle Sugar will be required. Are states willing to go lean for the sake of a meaningful political reformation of what the USA is about?
I posit that the ultimate engine is going to have to be divine, not political. Almost any constitution will suffice if the people are vibrantly serving God. Any constitution will fail, if the people are shrugging their affairs off to the devil.
And they don't want to rewrite it; they want to REINSTATE it.
At first you don’t secede.....
Article V ping. A useful article about Ms. Schlafly’s opposition to a Convention of the States.
The first one went miserably, and I posit that it was because of slavery. To beg before God to be free when you aren’t even making your inhabitants free, is to court a rebuke. It doesn’t matter what the North was doing, God is not letting the South hide behind the North.
The convention of states is a lunatic proposition. We have enough problems with unconstitutional politicians without sending a bunch of delegates from Illinois, California, Massachusetts, Delaware, Rhode Island, Vermont, Oregon, Washington to finger, lick and play with our constitution. I cannot believe that people are so stupid as to think delegates can be bound by mere words.
And do we have slavery today?
We have the soft slavery of low expectations (GWB called it bigotry). Our charity has decayed into idle entitlements, that do not urge betterment where they are applied.
We’ll have to become ungreat in a JFK sense of the all helping government (not its mission before God) before we can become great in a Trumpian sense.
Reforming this may or may not entail a Section V action on an earthly plane. God acts in mysterious ways, so goes the saying. But we need the spiritual basis.
Let them lick and play, they need a 38 state buy-in for it to stick.
The main problem is probably practical. It would be another self priding Kabuki theater, just as our modern Congress and state houses are today. It would overlook the real fundamentals of the human condition.
I would not disagree with you, However,you list only one aspect of the problem-albeit a big part. Another dimension is the almost total corruption of the electorate.
Indeed. The Constitutional Convention itself was a coup that went far beyond the scope authorized by the Congress.
One state, one vote.
"finger, lick and play with our constitution"
You are under the misconception that the Convention could change the Constitution. It would have no such power, any more than Congress has - it may only propose.
You are one of the few who recognized what happened at the Convention; i.e. the Old Articles of Confederation were thrown over.
See Post 11.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798 John Adams
Actually I think the Convention is a pipedream, unless, of course Trump manages to survive to be elected and has enough of a majority vote to overtop what will be the most intense vote fraud since the USSR and then himself pushes for a Convention. It is otherwise a pipedream because the next president will be a dictator perfected where the current dictator is still not entirely in control. I don't qualify thatby saying the next Democrat because the nature of the office has transformed by Congress ceding all its power to the President directly or through the Agencies. Congress cannot take that power back nor can it be given back. A president that tries to be COnstitutional will be overwhelmed by the Agencies which will become a collective dictatorship and politics thenceforward will be backstabbing battles for control of the Bureaucracy - the Agencies.
More Laws won't do that. If they won't obey the current law why would you expect they would obey the new ones? Unless of course the new laws only applied to you, like ObamaCare.
Yes: Social Security.
Yes: ObamaCare.
Yes: the lack of liberty to even build your own house without intrusive regulation, and a million other "you have to have permission" things.
In fact, you might be able to argue that it's more institutionalized now because it's the institutions of government that are doing it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.