Posted on 07/06/2022 9:55:53 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
This Fourth of July, watching people fight over what the Constitution means, I ask people, if you could change the Constitution, what would you change?
"The forefathers knew what they were doing," said one woman.
But the Constitution originally accepted slavery. It's good that we can amend it.
So what should we change?
"Add a balanced budget amendment," suggests Glenn Beck.
David Boaz of the Cato Institute recommends 18-year terms for the Supreme Court. "Maybe confirmation fights would be less bitter and partisan."
Others suggest term limits for Congress. Stossel TV's Mike Ricci takes the idea further. "If your father, mother, siblings, uncle, cousins were elected to federal office, you can't be." That would curb Kennedy/Bush-like dynasties.
Several people said they want to eliminate the Commerce Clause. It gives government virtually unlimited power over the economy, complains tech journalist Naomi Brockwell, "forcing people to participate in federal pension programs ... enabling the War on Drugs."
Some want an amendment to stop the growth of Washington regulatory agencies like the Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, and Federal Communications Commission. Economist Don Boudreaux calls them "a grave threat to Americans' liberties and prosperity."
The Supreme Court took a small step in restraining their power last week when it ruled that EPA bureaucrats can't set emission rules all by themselves. Congress has to vote on that.
Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif, proposes overturning Citizens United. He says that would stop those who "spend millions of dollars corrupting elections (and) would return our democracy to the town halls and citizen involvement that our founders envisioned."
I doubt that. Limits on political speech increase insiders' power.
Christina Martin of the Pacific Legal Institute wishes the Constitution did more to protect the rights of the individual. "How about a right to earn a living? How about a right to not have the government steal from you?"
But some young people told us they want to eliminate rights already in the Constitution, like free speech.
"Being able to speak your mind is important," said one, "as long as it's not in a way that is going to be long-term harmful to people."
Ouch. Who decides what is harmful? Will he get to censor my videos?
The Bill of Rights also includes the right to bear arms. Babylon Bee's Kyle Mann would add some lines to clarify that "you can't pass laws restricting ownership of firearms."
Others want to get rid of the Second Amendment. "We have police officers. We have a military," said one woman in Times Square. "So do we really need them? No."
I'm glad another person corrected her. "The only reason we stand on freedom is because we got the right to bear arms!" he says. "(Because of the Second Amendment) We're all a micro government in our own way."
Yes, some of the letters are so worn it’s hard to see them.
It is such a simple concept, if you are ONLY an American, you are naturally an American.
If you are also some thing else, you are NOT naturally an American.
That would include lots of Republicans who are fans of Cruz, Rubio, Jindal, Haley and George P Bush and everyone who was in office on Usurpation Day.
The leftists will stand against restoration with all their might. When caos ensues, the leftists will have a giant AHA moment, for that is the time where might is right. There is always someone bigger, stronger, smarter, or with more ammo!
Beer doesn't last long in storage, so in addition to the Civilian Marksmanship Program to sell off unused government surplus ammo, you'll need a Civilian Beersmanship Program.
Regardless of party, if you take an oath to uphold the Constitution and break that oath, you should be impeached, removed and where applicable prosecuted and jails for breaking the law.
I'm sad to say that for too long our republic has allowed our government to be controlled and ruled by individuals and parties that pick and choose the sections of the Constitution that they'll obey.
It will take a miracle to save our nation from the anti-American globalists who are causing our destruction.
Thune..
Come home
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
In their wisdom the Founding Fathers gave us a way to change the Constitution. Also, in their wisdom though, they made it difficult to change on purpose. If it was easy, the left would change it willy-nilly and be full of self-contradictions, none of them good.
I’m no expert on the American Constitution but I do think it should be amendable based on historical context. Not to restrict rights, but to extend and confirm precedence.
Example: First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
I’d split them back out to make it clear that the First Amendment currently merges five rights into one - they’re not additive or overlapping, they are distinctive. In no particular order:
1 (a). “The freedom of citizens to speak, to write, or to publish their individual sentiments, shall be inviolable.”
1 (b). “The freedom of journalists to investigate and publish, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.”
1 (c). “The People shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to peacefully assemble, and consult for their common good.”
1 (d). “The People shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to peacefully petition their Government (state or federal) for a redress of grievances.”
1 (e). “The People shall not be deprived of their right to practice their religion.”
1 (f). “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment or prohibition of a national religion.”
That’s only an example. The wording might be open to discussion. Personally, there needs to be a distinction between individuals and organisations at 1 (a) and (b) for the simple reason that individuals need protecting while they’re researching and publishing their findings but aggregators of content (especially online scrape-bots) are subject to corporate responsibility so regulating them is more of a states matter. In the event that a state overreaches, the individual journalists have protection under the Constitution through three constitutional rights, to blow the whistle and challenge the state.
1 (c) (d) and (e) are rights accorded to the individual. 1 (f) confirms that a State can adopt a religion, but it cannot do so in a way that violates the individual right of worship.
Allow Senators to be elected, but also allow State House, and popular recall.
<>The Founders made it difficult to do so for a reason..................and this is it................<>
For eighty-some years, Scotus regularly amended the Constitution. Too many Freepers are comfortable with that.
So we propose and then we run on it until we get the votes.
All PACs are corporations. All corporations are is a group of people joined together for a common end, like a team or any civic group or any other group of people (who have free speech rights.)
Money is a means -- the means -- of delivering political speech.
Do youu intend to prevent labor unions from lobbying or making political donations?
So Rand Paul would be ineligible?
Why the 14th?
1 (e) The right of the people to practice their religion shall not be denied or infringed in any manner.
"No one born with more than ONE nationality is NATURALLY an American because they are also born something else."
No, that's not what "natural born citizen" means. Never has. You were wrong then and you'll continue to be wrong. Find another obsession.
Only for a limited time. It didn't require slavery. In principle, slavery could have been abolished without an amendment.
I would:
Explicitly list a right of contract.
Limit the federal government’s authority to commerce that truly crosses state lines.
Strike the introductory clause of 2A, since it confuses so many.
Restore the selection of senators to the states.
What if a religion requires human sacrifice?
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.