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.

 

Is it time to update the U.S. Constitution?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 


your right noone enforces it thats the peoples job and they are too pacified to do anything about it.

the keep living on their knees instead of doing the right thing.

the constitution says the power lays within the people so it will take the people to enforce it.


and please change your signature.




posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 




didnt mean you meant the other one.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I'm the only Rock.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Lysander Spooner's No Treason: The Constitution of no authority.

I think Ron Paul takes Spooner very seriously.




and please change your signature.


No!
edit on 20-6-2011 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Huh Paul..yeah I like him
You can't change the Constitution without centuries of process you'll just have to circumvent those who circumvent it and try to get them to obey it.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 


That's a good read .. a synopsis for those that don't want to read (kinda tedious) is the philosophy that people can govern themselves without the actual need for a government .. that there can be a government of an extremely small size that would suffice for the general welfare of the union, but serve no purpose in the regulations of our lives. This based on the majority ruling the minority naturally leads to a suppression of rights by restricting the actions or desires of a population while carrying out policies and procedures many would neither want or condone.

edit on 6/20/2011 by Rockpuck because: SPELL CHECK! good lord..



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheOneElectric
To be honest with you Jefferson literally said that every generation needed it's own revolution. This definitely implies a need for a new constitution so that things can make sense and be pertinent to the times in which people live in.


Can you show me the source of when he said such? It is a derived projection from when he said "God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed." Speaking wholly that over time, people will disconnect from the strong draw to the revolutionary spirit that was in the hearts and minds of many during the war. So literary he said no such thing.

More so, we have means to perform a revolution every time we elect new people into seats of representation. We perform a peaceful transfer of power that the world has never known. I leave this issue in regards to Jefferson with one of his less famous quotes, in which he wrote to John Adams, "The generation which commences a revolution rarely complete it."


Let's face it, we live in an era so far removed from 1787. Some things still apply heavily, and other things need clarification or reworking.


Like what specifically? If we look at the Constitution as a document that serves to establish government structure and limitations how is it outdated? Specifically, those that view Government as a must have to dictate the economy, protect the weak, and decide we need to enter private contracts or face government force then I guess you are correct...it needs to be reworked.


We do need a new constitution, one that actually focuses on a respect for the divinity within all men. One that particularly and clearly protects privacy (You have implied privacy under the current one, not overt. Which means it can be snatched at any second). I really do believe that a bull of rights is essential, but shouldn't limit our rights to those things enumerated, but to merely act as a guideline.


There is no need to have rights listed because they will be construed, even as painfully James Madison made clear, as positive rights. Hence the Ninth Amendment, in which rights not enumerated cannot be viewed as they do not exist. All power and rights come from the individual and thus that which they have not willfully given up cannot be taken away.

It is impossible to create Bills of Rights that will cover every single human right we maintain. Who gets to choose which are enumerated and which are not? Your assertion that such a right, if not explicitly defined or listed can be easily snatched from your grasps. As Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

edit on 20-6-2011 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-6-2011 by ownbestenemy because: Fixed a sentance



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 


That's a good read .. a synopsis for those that don't want to read (kinda tedious) is the philosophy that people can govern themselves without the actual need for a government .. that there can be a government of an extremely small size that would suffice for the general welfare of the union, but serve no purpose in the regulations of our lives. This based on the majority ruling the minority naturally leads to a suppression of rights by restricting the actions or desires of a population while carrying out policies and procedures many would neither want or condone.

edit on 6/20/2011 by Rockpuck because: SPELL CHECK! good lord..


Isnt that a wide example of anarchy?



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 


again...eh?

take a look @ this video Yea I am asking you to take 1 hour out of your life... so you can answer the following question...



Does the law of the US need to be so complicated when we have a so called perfect document, but yet have so many statues and amendments that there are law books as thick as my house?

perhaps we should simplify it a bit... doncha think? simplify it with the basic principles that reflect modern society in the US... the people themselves, and the people only... not the elites.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


Not to mention the blogger from the OP hasn't a clue as to why the Senate has two from each state. Or why we use the Electoral College system. Then again, 99% of this board and 99% of Americans can't make a five minute presentation as to why those are in the Constitution.

The OP linked blog is a call for a even more major shift towards mob rule than we already are at.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Yeah! Let's get rid of all those pesky rights that seem to be hampering the great goodness of government so damn much. Stupid rights. What is it with all these individuals that think they have some kind of inherent political authority anyway? End this Constitutional republic now, and give us that wonderful mess we call democracy. Lord knows I can't wait to be ruled by a majority, or some well oiled minority. Hell, I don't care who rules me, just as long as I am ruled. Chain me, beat me, abuse me, please don't respect me.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by HappilyEverAfter
 


Why yes...... yes it is...


Technically though it's a description of Libertarianism since, technically, there is a very, very, very small government. Anarchy is absolutely no government.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


Exactly he's a dumbass Progressive who hasn't a clue how our government works.

How many times do we have to tell Progressives: YOU don't elect the President .... the States do. The Senate represents the STATES, the House the individual districts.

*sigh* .. if we had a better education system we probably wouldn't have half the issues we do in this country..



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


thats the point man

stupid people are easier to control.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 





*sigh* .. if we had a better education system we probably wouldn't have half the issues we do in this country..


How much better do you think indoctrination should be, for crying out loud? Sheesh! State of the art indoctrination going on, and no one is happy with it. Just goes to show, you can't please everyone.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 



Technically though it's a description of Libertarianism since, technically, there is a very, very, very small government. Anarchy is absolutely no government.

Spooner was an anarchist.

Most Libertarians are anarchist.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


Try explaining to people that we have no national elections and watch their heads explode. They truly want to be ruled by a central government.

I make no contention to figure out the blogger's political view and your assertion may be correct, but in the end, it is easy to see that the writer is ignorant to what a republic is, why it was setup in the manner it was and probably doesn't give the Federalist Papers any weight because it would destroy any argument he has otherwise in terms of understanding the Constitution and how we administer government.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
reply to post by monkcaw
 


This is one of the main reasons it needs to be overhauled or scrapped completely
Because It is Not Enforced equally for all.

It is a Sold document.
America has been suckered by Big Business and the Banks,,,, not to mention other governments,,,,, like England, and Israel to name just a few of our Global 'friends'.


Don't confuse the Constitution with how it's being interrepted. If you were to scrap it and start over it won't make any problems go away you know. As far as big business and the banks that is Congress's job to make laws about and has nothing to do with the Constitution.

America is the Constitution and removing it would be akin to destroying the country. You would no longer have a people that can turn to it and say "see look what the founders said". You would have nothing but a loose coalition of political ideology's.

The Constitution is a brilliant peice of work not for any one rule it lays down but how in a very short way lay's out the foundation for America's beliefs and how, no matter how long it exists, it was crafted to adapt to changing times while still retaining it's core value. The Constitution has been the basis for many other country's constitutions and in my opinion is one of the greatest written works ever created.

It binds America into something solid and is the foundation anyone can turn too when they are wondering how do we approach things. Many people have died for this document and to say that you can just simply toss it aside is to me one of the most unpatriotic things a person in this country can say.

Because you have issues with government policy should in no way reflect on the Constitution. It was made to be adapted through the amendment process so why you would feel the need to scrap it has no basis in reason. It is hard to change but that was on purpose as the founders did not want a document that could be easily manipulated reducing it's effectiveness in the outline of what America stands for.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 


That's a good read .. a synopsis for those that don't want to read (kinda tedious) is the philosophy that people can govern themselves without the actual need for a government .. that there can be a government of an extremely small size that would suffice for the general welfare of the union, but serve no purpose in the regulations of our lives. This based on the majority ruling the minority naturally leads to a suppression of rights by restricting the actions or desires of a population while carrying out policies and procedures many would neither want or condone.

edit on 6/20/2011 by Rockpuck because: SPELL CHECK! good lord..

That's not all ``No Treason`` is about though.

Spooner also argued that as a legal contract the Constitution was invalid because individuals didn't consent to it.
edit on 20-6-2011 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
1: Read the Anti Federalist Papers,

a copy can be found here.

2: Which CONstitution are we referring to exactly?



3: Vote you say?



In Conclusion:
It is my patriotic duty to inform anyone with the ability to perceive this painful reality.....
A: The CONstitution was the original subversion of our Sovereignty.
B: The CONstitution is the reason we needed a Bill of Rights.
C: The Original Organic Constitution was shelved and a Corporate Charter Constitution has been established since 1933.
D: There have been no real elected officials since 1933, simply corporate/BANKRUPTCY administrators.
E: We cannot Vote our way out of this one...

Debunked all of this have you?
By all means, please, do so now for the rest of the class...

Ever thought how odd it is that much of what the Anti Federalists feared... has now become our reality?

Good night and good luck...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join