It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Constitution is obsolete.

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 11:46 AM
a reply to: nwtrucker

This thread is upsetting, to say the least. The Constitution is the foundation of the conservative movement in the U.S..

That right there is why you believe the way you do!

I am far from being a Conservative, yet I'm not blinded by what freedom truly means due to partisan talking points. The Constitution is about freedom for EVERY citizen of this country regardless of partisan rhetoric and the tactics being used by the two party system to further divide this nation to it's final breaking point.

The Constitution isn't broken OR obsolete! It is the out of control government and the unwillingness of it's subjects to recognize that freedom requires ALL OF US to tolerate even those whom we disagree with and to find a common ground in which to work things out in the best interest of all!

Do you see that happening? I don't! All I see are hundreds if not thousands of different groups *tribes* that have their own selfish desires that in their minds they want tolerance towards their views and wants, but they lack showing tolerance towards those that they oppose!

How's that working out?

That might be freedom of speech, but it sure as hell isn't conducive to Freedom for all!

edit on 2-8-2014 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 12:19 PM
a reply to: seeker1963

I have no real disagreement with your post at all.

I suppose in one way, though, what's changed is while there is belief in the Constitution in many, there is an amazing amount of lip-service belief-no follow though.

Still, I must stress, the Constitution, in application to today's situations may be insufficient to save this nation.

No one seems willing to respond to my basic point in this.

If my premise is true, then belief that that Constitution is the "answer" becomes a mental trap, at the least.

Actions way outside the Constitutional restrictions are required from what I can see, if for no other reason than to counteract the unconstitutional actions that have gotten us into this mess. We'd be tied up in partisan courts for years...

posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 12:57 PM
a reply to: seeker1963

I don't disagree with you in the slightest. LOL.

I do NOT see a fix, at least fast enough to survive, within the framework of the Constitution. Period.

I believe it is too late.

I've sited examples, yet, have no definitive responses on how to Constitutionally fix the nations mess other than elect the right people. Any indication we have the "right people"? .....

posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 04:38 PM
I would add only that the people of our nation--the masses, the average citizens; we the people who populate this great land--never had equal or essentially any "say" in drafting the Constitution. Rather, this was done for them, for us, by a very small and elite cross section of the colonial American population. And as it was done then, those centuries ago, so it is still done today. Most of us practice our "right" to vote, yes? However, we do not choose who we wish to run for office, nor do we have means to get to know these people (politicians) who will rule us if elected and further, there is no guarantee to the voter their candidate will do anything remotely similar to their campaign slogans. Primaries aside, we the people only get to choose our rulers from a small predetermined pool of so called eligible candidates. Additionally, there can be little doubt these days that the more cash one possesses or can raise directly influences the success of any American political campaign. Our system is top to bottom corrupt, putrescent, bloated and deliquescing.

Personally, I have never understood the "Patriot" movements which wave the "original" Constitution as their standard. What these groups fail to realize is that these sacred documents --on which our nation was founded--were never intended to provide the common man with equal say in government--or even equal rights under the law. We the common men and women were never intended to be counted as equals to the then new American aristocracy. The way I see it men who rule nations, who command large hereditary fortunes have since human nascency reserved truly equal rights only for those they considered equally endowed of material wealth and birthright (often by god no less) or for enemies too powerful for them to defeat by any other means other than doing business with them.

True enough I am possessed of little faith yet in any facet of our government. We kind of live in an aquarium or so it seems to me. Or a terrarium more accurately perhaps--in which we essentially provide nothing for ourselves and have no real say in our destiny insofar as the direction of policies taken by our rulers. Our rulers very forcibly rule us ... how can one deny this? We do not rule them for certain, nor do we the people dictate to them a single thing. We do not establish the borders of any aspect of our lives other than in choosing to follow the borders established by them and dictated to us. Should any of us choose not to follow these dictates we become victims of cause and effect (of course civilization must establish consequences for crimes in order to exist) and lose our freedom or in extreme cases, our lives.

Apologies for the rant. In my opinion, a thousand Constitutions revised hundreds of times would make no difference for the common man or women. Without doubt further "rights" have been awarded to we the people since the founding, and yet many have also been suspended or removed in the name of national or public security. Alas, it is what is.

posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 05:20 PM
a reply to: AphoticJoe

There was a time when one could know and endorse the candidate of choice. Smaller communities where a family, often financially well off who had a history of fairness and even charitable acts in their communities could be trusted to make decisions in the people's names.

That aspect was built into the process , votes, choices. We had some voice even though the information was "filtered" much as it is today.

It is ironic that the very love of that Constitution is being used to thwart our freedoms today. It actually holds much of what gone haywire in place.

posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 11:59 PM
a reply to: nwtrucker

It was based on common law. We have forgotten that legal basis. That is why it appears to be failing. Codify a secular common law, and bring back common law people's grand juries. We will rocket into abundance.
edit on 2-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 12:18 AM
a reply to: nwtrucker

Know what?

You're right. (waves white flag)

Get rid of it. Get rid of any sense of freedom and individuality and personal responsibility.

Trash it all.

Hell, most Americans don't want the responsibility that real freedom demands. Give us dat ol time commynism! Or any -ism you want!

Make Obama Emperor. Trash the Bill of Rights. Burn the Constitution. (we can roast marshmallows)

There is no sense arguing about it any more. People don't want freedom.

They abhor responsibility.

Can I have my Obama-free-money-check now?

posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 12:28 AM
a reply to: beezzer

Abundance and liberty go hand in hand, and no ism tried has defined that successfully. Perpetual Austerity, is a concept that should be abandoned. One nation tried to leave that concept. What happened?

No checks would be needed if the currency system was setup to benefit everyone. Why is it setup to only benefit a few? Why is it not setup to benefit you and me instead?

We are being our own worst enemies.

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 12:34 AM
a reply to: Not Authorized

I don't care anymore.

Just want my check, free cable and phone, and a cold one.

I want to watch the world burn.

posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 01:12 AM
a reply to: beezzer

No no no. Please don't give up beezer. One can want to watch the world burn, but, remember the mythological story of the Phoenix. I've been where you are at. Ellie Goulding's song, Burn, was good therapy for me during that time.

How can I help... Doobie Brothers, Listen to the Music. Actually listen to the lyrics, and apply them. Especially the newer artists.

The Constitution stays. The problem is some people think it doesn't apply to them when someone does something they disagree with, even when it clearly protects another's freedoms to do so. And some, specially the oligarchy, ignore it completely when it comes to profit margins.

I prefer Newcastle.

I am on your team.
edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 05:54 AM
a reply to: Not Authorized

"The constitution says"....your right. That's what it says.

We buy into it. That's how we become trapped by it. Those vested interests and their supporters use our very Constitution to protect, continue and expand their power.

Add in about half the population LIKES what's going on. States like California, Mass., so on would use their "Constitutional rights" to continue along this path and use us to finance their individual agendas.

I honestly don't see how we can recover, considering the time crunch, within the bounds of the Constitution.

The rule book needs to be thrown out. cast aside. Suspended. Call it what you want.

The very same scenario when this country started. No rules. Common sense solutions for the problems at hand. Once we achieved a viable group of colonies, THEN we set about making the largely worked for a couple of centuries.

Letting the guys who want to continue their idyllic socialist dreams allows the rest of the nation to go our route in our own states. Readopt the Constitution in those states that believe in the Judeo-Christian morals. Smaller but wiser...hopefully...for another couple of centuries.

Sigh, just thinking outside the box. Just an idea...

posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 12:25 PM
a reply to: nwtrucker

No. Palestinian treatment as of late, has demonstrated that your so called morals, are full of crap. You have no more high ground. Your religion after 2000 years has become morally bankrupt. This is not the first time, either. Recall the Spanish Inquisition? You use religion to go on 21st century crusades and bomb people who disagree with your religion. Last I checked, it was Christendom trying to limit individuals rights using State constitutions and homosexual persons. Yeah, I called them persons.

I'm a heretic by your standards, and listen more to what Jesus said, then you and his so called followers. Imposters and frauds. Salt of the Earth indeed. Spreading death and torture in the name of Jesus, but, your saved!! He would weep at your actions. Refresh your memory on the sermon on the mount, Matthew 7:12, and the Great White Throne judgment. Then investigate the many worlds interpretation of quantum physics. Who maybe sitting there? It maybe someone you do not expect.

Equal protection, is what is missing. Read my signature, particularly Article 6, and the international covenant on civil and political rights.

Notice that applies to everyone? I understand that, or, in other words, stand with and under that authority. It is the first and second highest supreme law of the land. Remember Amendments 9 and 10?

The Constitution Stays. If you want Christian rights, feel free to relocate to a place that uses the Vatican See as the root law to allow for others religious oppression and forced perpetual austerity. You are no better than an Islamist. The goals are the same. Eradication of a conflicting view, at any cost.

But not in my land anymore. This is a common law nation, not an ecclesiastical law nation. Find commonality. Your religious rights end, where another's begins.

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 02:40 PM
a reply to: Not Authorized

Well, first, it's "off-topic". Second, I FULLY support Israel's actions in Gaza. I decide my "moral high-ground" and suffer not the sins of the past. (especially when bleated unceasingly by resentful liberals...)

Therefore, nice try.

There is, however, one common thread between the two...national survival.

At this rate, Israel will last longer than the U.S.!

Thank you for giving proof that this nation should split up...otherwise your ilk could taste the "moral code" of the rest..

posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 11:29 PM
a reply to: nwtrucker

I think we need some definitions, to clarify my position on what I think of your above post. Especially after that whole "Could taste the "moral code" of the rest" comment.

The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance; or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power. "Treason" consists of two elements: Adherence to the enemy, and rendering him aid and comfort. Cramer v. U. S., U.S.N.Y., 65 S.Ct. 918, 932, 325 U.S. 1, 89 L.Ed. 1441].

in English law. Treason against the king or sovereign, as distinguished from petit or petty treason, which might formerly be committed against a subject. [4 Bl.Comm. 74, 75; 4 Steph.Comm. 183, 184]

We the People.... do ordain and establish.. THIS Constitution (Preamble).

“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law.” (Yick Wo v. hopkins, 118 US 356, 370).

You've got nothing. The Constitution Stands. If you'd like to know which side you are on, you can start with my signature. The clicky links are there for those too lazy to Google it themselves.

Would you like "my ilk" to start saying and pointing out that Christendom has become turncoats against the united States and our Constitution for Israel? We can start by pointing out the above definitions and comments like yours. Seems to me, that Christendom values Israel's scripted incremental genocide, over the united States, and pretty much anything else good in the world.

You support this? Classy. That's a great Judeo-Christian code you got going there. Jesus would clearly be supportive of such atrocities.

If you want to take the label of being Christian, then you need to act like him. You are his steward in name. Jesus was a baby killer? He would support this? That's nice to know. Somehow, I don't think this kind of attitude will help at harvest festivals.

Glad your "moral code" is on the way out. Forever.

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 4 2014 @ 07:27 PM
a reply to: Not Authorized First of all, I'm not a Christian.. LOL.

Second of all, the Judeo-Christian MORAL CODE, hint, hint, is..sorry was the foundation that allowed the Constitution workability. To Wit, men of good will working together in the effort to achieve common opportunity to prosper.

Apparently, you deny this even existed? By pointing out violations of that code by people that code somehow becomes invalid?? All codes are violated, it doesn't negate the code itself. it merely points out human frailty.

Israel? Plenty of threads for you to vent on. I support them fully, despite any of their frailties.

Treason? Tell that to the Founding Fathers. That label is used by the ruling group when it triumphs over the insurgents. History will label who guilty of treason. Not you...or me.

Many argue treason has already occurred within our gov't.. it's all perspective, I suppose.

As the moral code of this nation has been eroded, so has the prosperity of the nation. All levels, all "classes".

In the face of so few men of good will, the Constitution, in that wise, also becomes obsolete. Used by men of ill will, we become mislead into believing that document can "save us". It cannot. Not without those men of good will and of same mind.

Be you a Liberal. a secular humanist, whatever, I would spare you and me that potential I mentioned.

Agree to disagree. part ways. Do your own thing. Those that you hold in such contempt see you in the same light. Deal with it.

Now that I think of it, I now understand a bit better the views of the South since the civil war. An enforcement of the "Freedom" that the Constitution was designed to offer. It is now used to lessen our freedoms on a daily basis. A brilliant trap that ensnares those who have held it so dear for so long and at such high cost.

A bit contradictory, to label the choice of dissolution as "Treason" if freely chosen.

Again, just thinking outside the box. I could be completely wrong on this. food for thought though.

posted on Aug, 4 2014 @ 08:22 PM
a reply to: nwtrucker

Much better trucker! I am impressed!

Now, I feel my viewpoint of real liberalism combined with being as neutral as possible, can be discussed. What you imply, is progressive "liberalism". You can see they are not the same.

Question: Why do you want to dissolve the united States, our Constitution, our home? Is it over a God that hates you, for simply being you? And just as a reminder, that same piece of paper you wish to dissolve over a God that has already condemned you to this great vacation place? Why? What is wrong with you?

Look at what you are supporting and saying for once. It is time to awaken my friend. The Constitution isn't the problem. We are. The Constitution protects us against things like this. But it can't, if you don't understand it. When was the last time you read it?

Have you ever read this international law? For some reason, that treaty is not going to be ratified by Washington, or Israel anymore. Hmmmmmm. Perhaps we need some public pressure to force that ratification, or, do you think domestic tranquility is only for us special people in a small part of this tiny blue dot?

As for that moral code? Don't be so sure of that. Deists, do not necessarily believe in any god in particular. A particular group of people hijacked that tidbit of history for some good old fashioned propaganda.

Besides, if you think that is the only moral code out there.... You are very mistaken my friend.

Jesus, if he existed at all and his moral code, was completely different than what you think it is.
edit on 4-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 4 2014 @ 08:56 PM
a reply to: nwtrucker

My country's constitution is still working pretty darn good.

I don't see why you guys can't make yours work the way it's supposed to, as well...

Perhaps it has something to do with whom you're voting in and allowing to oversee its plausibility and implementation ?

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 09:54 AM
a reply to: CranialSponge I recall Canada before the latest version of the Canadian Constitution was adopted. It changed almost nothing in both the lives and views of Canadians from what I can see.

It isn't the Constitution, per say, that's the issue. If properly utilized, the Constitution of the unmatched by any nation's including Canada's.

The problem in the U.S. is the sheer loyalty to that document, also unmatched anywhere else, is being used by those that have subverted that same document into believing that restoring it alone will solve the nation's problems. It will not.

That is the simple truth of it, IMO.

That shakes the very core belief of the conservative, et al, movement in the U.S..

For example, there is a common belief, which I shared until recently, that restoring the Tenth Amendment would solve the federal gov't's incursion into state affairs. Education, EPA, etc..

Take the EPA as it applies to the oil industry. Massive restrictions on development of known reserves far in excess of any other nation's. This plays completely into the major oil companies hands! Restricting development drives up the value of already developed reserves, hence profits!

As the oil industry develops those remaining reserves based on a 50 year projected return, their long term profits benefit from restricted development of those reserves.Those that they do NOT control which would increase supply thereby reducing demand and therefore profits messes with long term goals and development. Hence the war on fracking. The big oil companies, OPEC in general, the Saudis, all funding/supporting the PR campaign against it.

If the Tenth Amendment was enforced, the EPA would cease to exist. I my mind, also a bad thing. The oil companies and others would now become largely unencumbered and would take "liberties" under the pressure to increase profits. Hence, more avoidable pollution.

The solution lies in a workable balance. Some clearly defined and restricted federal oversite that is limited in it's power with an effective "watchdog" that watches over the federal "watchdog" could, perhaps, work.

The Constitution clearly defined areas of responsibility- a balance- to maintain that balance. The Constitution has been violated for quite a while and lately ignored altogether. There is no balance left to maintain.

Throw in the "time factor"/wiggle room to right the "balance" and the constitution, the balancing tool, becomes obsolete.

Obsolete in the sense that any workable restoration requires far more draconian measures than the Constitution permits!

Therefore my premise is that the lock-step support of the Constitution under the present mess is misguided and actually counted on by those that intend to maintain the current direction. Both ideologically and financially.

Our greatest strength has been subverted into a trap.

Once again, just thinking outside the box. I could be completely wrong....I hope so

Neither scenario is solvable under current Constitutional

edit on 5-8-2014 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 11:42 AM
a reply to: nwtrucker

The solution is right in front of you. You look in the mirror at him everyday.

posted on Aug, 5 2014 @ 12:30 PM
a reply to: Not Authorized

Thank you for the compliment...I think..LOL.

I am not well educated. I am somewhat better read than the average, I suppose.

I have travelled/worked 49 states for decades. I have vacationed in Hawaii so can say I have a grass roots, lay, view of the nation.

The Constitution is the greatest articulation in the history. The strength and fundamental of this nation. (that's your answer to the "some reason" the U.S. never signed onto international law. Pure and simple. If and when you can show me, both by act and articulation, superiority over the Constitution then I'd discuss it. Also, naming both the U.S. and Israel as the two being out of lockstep with the "international movement" perfectly explains the black PR against both and your political leanings.)

Just an observation, not a condemnation.

Occam's razor is the basis for my premise.

We are past the point of recovery as a nation especially if restrained by the Constitution in those solutions.

The fundamental support of the Constitution is being used to ensure the continued direction of this nation as the Constitution is unequipped to handle all that is required of it in our present situation/s.

There is insufficient time remaining to us other than by-passing the Constitution.

Solutions, even Constitutional ones, would be blocked/fought in a Judicial system where Judicial activism-circumventing the Constitution- is the norm.

I quote the General from the Korean War. "Retreat, Hell! We're advancing to the rear!"

The (possible) solution.

The U.S. is an idea. Not a location.

The Constitution combined with the Judeo-Christian moral code worked. A one -two punch unequalled. Neither stands for long without the other. (Yes, as you say, there are other moral codes. Time constrains preclude experimentation. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it.)

About half this nation is no longer supportive of that moral code-including yourself- and the support of the Constitution is limited to lip-service by too many.

Perhaps the militias intuitively understand this on one level. Hunker down. Band together with those of like survive.

I say expand that. Rather than small groups, make it States of similar mind and hopefully without violence get a "divorce". An amicable parting of ways.

The smaller union now re-applies the Constitution with the moral code that was workable. (Hopefully men of good will and courage).

In this way, the Constitution would be revived. It surely is dead in our current plight.

I have no doubts you disagree with this premise. I see you, my friend, as the signal example of using the Union and the Constitution as a tool against it's very survival.

You're vitriol against the moral code- and Israel- in favor of international law exposes you for the very forces I wish to defeat. The current nation assures the defeat of both the Constitution AND the Judeo-Christian moral code.

A new Union assures the continuance of both and the fastest, most peaceful resurgence of the same.

I think....LOL.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in