It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If you could change one sentence in the US Constitution what and why?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:05 PM
link   
If you could change one sentence in the US Constitution what would it be?
What kind of change might have happened here if your change happened?
Words carry weight and have consequences. Some times a little change of phrase changes the world.
No future terms entered please. The change of text must be understood by the original authors. You are only allowed a single change so choose the document with care and think through the possible impact carefully.

You might consider what other historical documents to make a single adjustment on. It's a little tweak but imagine what would have happened if instead of mentioning Atlantis in passing the location was included?




posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Hm, that's a really interesting topic to ponder. I think I'd tack on to the end:

"WHEREAS the United States of America, being a prosperous country, shall provide it's citizens a free cheeseburger of their choosing the first Friday of the new year".

Who wouldn't want a free cheeseburger? It has the added benefit of making us look cool because we can pull off such a huge undertaking.

In all seriousness, I'd probably add something about lifetime term limits for the legislative branch.
edit on 12-3-2014 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:09 PM
link   
"We the people" because your politicians seem to think the constitution only applies to them.

Oops forgot to add the second amendment I mean line...Freudian slip
edit on 3/12/2014 by Kukri because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Anyone who violates any section of the bill of rights, including modifying them, making laws/statutes that infringe upon them
shall be hung while receiving a public stoning after eyes gouged out.

That would settle it all, no infringing on the rights to protest, free speech, travel freely, bear arms (felons have a right to defend their families ALSO), etc.

IF a person can take oxycontin, they can take heroin.
If a person can sell their body to dig ditches, be cannon fodder, be a massuesse,etc. they can be a hooker if so inclined, it is THEIR body.
If a person can grow GMO poison crops, they can grow ANY plant they want.
If a person chooses NOT to wear a seatbelt, they have their freedom to choose.

Every problem would be curtailed if ALL govt officials, cops etc. had to actually follow the bill of rights.

And there would BE NO IRS either!



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In a truly free society, being necessary to the SECURITY of a FREE state, the right of the people to keep, and bear ARMS, shall not be infringed.

To wit that doesn't mean the 'government' gets to ban arms based on nothing, but the way it looks.

That doesn't mean people have to get background checks, and ask government for permission to a CLEAR right that comes from our CREATOR.

That doesn't mean people have to wait 7 days to month, or pay taxes, or fees on them.

Shall not be infringed can't get anymore clear.

Hands off.

Longer than one sentence, but pretty sure it would clear up of the confusion that some people have.

Since they think it is ok to violate Americans civil liberties, under the false pretense of 'making them safer'.

That is what I would change.
edit on 12-3-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:25 PM
link   

neo96
Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In a truly free society, being necessary to the SECURITY of a FREE state, the right of the people to keep, and bear ARMS, shall not be infringed.

To wit that doesn't mean the 'government' gets to ban arms based on nothing, but the way it looks.

That doesn't mean people have to get background checks, and ask government for permission to a CLEAR right that comes from our CREATOR.

That doesn't mean people have to wait 7 days to month, or pay taxes, or fees on them.



Shall not be infringed can't get anymore clear.

Hands off.

Longer than one sentence, but pretty sure it would clear up of the confusion that some people have.

Since they think it is ok to violate Americans civil liberties, under the false pretense of 'making them safer'.

That is what I would change.
edit on 12-3-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


I lieke this and I'm not a gun person.
edit on 3/12/2014 by Kukri because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by datasdream
 


"WHEREAS any citizen voluntarily entering into public federal service, taking the oath to support the Constitution of the United States who willfully breaks or circumvents that oath shall immediately be sent to Guantanamo prison for the remainder of their life."

(and be poked with sticks.)
edit on 061pm0606pm72014 by Bassago because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by datasdream
 


Id like to put...... "This is only a recommendation....do as you will" ...right at the end or it could just say "just kidding!"

atleast this way we wouldnt all be so upset and depressed about the state of the country
edit on 12-3-2014 by cosmicexplorer because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-3-2014 by cosmicexplorer because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by datasdream
 

You can (and probably will) tell me that it's none of my business, but I would strongly recommend deleting this sentence;

and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

Why? Because this is the clause which decrees that every year or so the United States will experience a damaging Budget stand-off, because government and Congress are controlled by different parties.
It's not the fault of either the Democrats or the Republicans; it's the fault of the Founding Fathers.
Let your Cabinet officers be elected to Congress. Better yet, insist that they get elected to Congress and give an account there of their work in office.
Better yet, let your Cabinet officers, especially the Treasury Secretary, be such people as can command majority votes in Congress, bacause they belong to the majority party. Then you won't have Budget standoffs.






edit on 12-3-2014 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:32 PM
link   
It's a lot of stuff.

I might change "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment." to "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall not have the sole Power of Impeachment, which will rest with the people they represent"

Something like that.

Or I might tack on this: "And no Representative shall serve more than two terms or have this as their sole livelihood and income."

to the end of this: "No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by datasdream
 


I'd clear up the second amendment. "Any citizen of the US should have the right to arm themselves with any level of weaponry used by their govenrment so they are never inadequatly equiped to deal with tyranny should the need arise. However, the most advanced forms of weaponry should be excluded to that use and not extend to private lesuirely use."

In other words, you can own a tank, but unless you plan on defending your country from tyranny or from invaders you should have no right to use it. Also the list of "advanced weaponsry is really only specifc to heavy ordiance. Tanks, planes, mortors, high explosive. The use of guns in general would not be detered in any way for leisure like hunting or target practice.
edit on 12-3-2014 by GrimReaper86 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Bassago
reply to post by datasdream
 


"WHEREAS any citizen voluntarily entering into public federal service, taking the oath to support the Constitution of the United States who willfully breaks or circumvents that oath shall immediately be sent to Guantanamo prison for the remainder of their life."

(and be poked with sticks.)
edit on 061pm0606pm72014 by Bassago because: (no reason given)


this WHY BADGES are REDCOATS.

Only a major pile of you know what would do anything against their oath for a paycheck/pension.

Shall not be infringed.. that is clear, and EVERY cop is the ENEMY of the people for they ENFORCE acts against this simple rule. background checks, ccw permits, etc.. EVERY COP IS THE ENEMY of the PEOPLE, because EVERY COP infringes.

I CHOSE TO DISCONTINUE in LE because I am not a traitor. EVERYONE with a badge betrays the Bill of Rights daily for a paycheck/pension



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 



That doesn't mean people have to get background checks, and ask government for permission to a CLEAR right that comes from our CREATOR.

LOL - God told you to carry a gun? I like Grimreaper86's version better.

I think I would add a sentence defining personhood and clarifying that corporations are not persons, they are collectives. I'm off, since I'm sure someone will have something choice to say about that.

edit on 12-0320143-1414 by gwynnhwyfar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 





Or I might tack on this: "And no Representative shall serve more than two terms or have this as their sole livelihood and income."


Think everyone would agree with that.

Term limits are good enough for the Potus.

They are good enough for congressman.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by gwynnhwyfar
 





LOL - God told you to carry a gun?


Seriously ?

That is what you got from that ?

ALL rights we have come from the creator.

The creator is not government.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I'm afraid so, that one sentence threw the whole thing for me.

I am happy to report, however, that for once, we do agree, on the term limits! Circle the day on your calendar...



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:18 PM
link   
The title to "This is obsolete".



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by datasdream
 


Abolish congress. Or limit their terms to one year.

Thank you.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by datasdream
 


I would add one sentence:

"apply liberally"



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:34 PM
link   
16th Amendment:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.


DELETE
And I'm done.




top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join