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

reply to post by Rockdisjoint

Please go on; how exactly doesn't it work?

If you come back with "a distinct lack of socialist redistribution of the wealth" as is everyman's"right". (Which seems to be a rather popular stance around here lately)You can take that silly-assed idea down the hall... .While I'm going for a refill of coffee...

It is "Law" It is just not enforced by the bought and paid for congress (who are the people's check's on the system)...

Originally posted by Maslo
1. abolish the birtright citizenship

Why?

2. define the 14th amendment "person" more explicitly - based on the status of higher brain - something like a homo sapiens possessing a sufficiently developed cerebral cortex. This would exclude early-term foetuses and braindead patients, and include late-term foetuses.

‘Persons’ in the 14th Amendment, or elsewhere in the Constitution, doesn’t apply to fetuses, only to persons who have been born.

Why does this need to be changed?

reply to post by 46ACE

It is "Law" It is just not enforced by the bought and paid for congress (who are the people's check's on the system)...

So it doesn't work. It's just a piece of paper that just sits their and as a legal contract it has no authority.

Originally posted by 46ACE
reply to post by Rockdisjoint

 

Please go on; how exactly doesn't it work?

If you come back with "a distinct lack of socialist redistribution of the wealth" as is everyman's"right". (Which seems to be a rather popular stance around here lately)You can take that silly-assed idea down the hall... .While I'm going for a refill of coffee...

It is "Law" It is just not enforced by the bought and paid for congress (who are the people's check's on the system)...

edit on 21-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

Well said, 46ACE!
I really do not think the constitution needs to be changed, rewritten or ,heaven forbid, scrapped! It simply needs to be enforced. If our govt. won't enforce it, Then, we the people, HAVE to!

It could stand a bit of updating, via ammendment or otherwise, with a long list of things the government is not allowed to do, and clear penalties for doing them. Keep the "rights" of the people, and seriously limit the powers of the government. Severe (and I do mean severe) penalties should be put in place for any lawmaker who introduces an unconstitutional bill.

reply to post by aptness

Why?

Because I consider automatically getting US citizenship just by being born on US soil to be quite absurd and unsystemic. Citizenship should be either inherited from parents (there may be some additional conditions here), or granted by going through the proper process for foreigners. There is no point in having birtright citizenship at all, it only serves to generate anchor babies. Most countries in the world do not have birtright citizenship, and they are fine.

‘Persons’ in the 14th Amendment, or elsewhere in the Constitution, doesn’t apply to fetuses, only to persons who have been born. Why does this need to be changed?

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I believe this should apply to late-term fetuses as well, but should not apply to braindead people, based on the status of their respective nervous systems.

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by 46ACE

 

It is "Law" It is just not enforced by the bought and paid for congress (who are the people's check's on the system)...

So it doesn't work. It's just a piece of paper that just sits their and as a legal contract it has no authority.

One more time "it" is fine; "it" is not enforced.Because people have been fed(and accept) the idea: " Oh its a"living document" malleable and open to the debate of the self-serving "flatulence" that passes for "deep political thought" on the hill.

" harumph... Harumph... Mr.speaker: I must object!: (point of order) In response to my resolution;The Honorable gentleman from west Virginia has just tweeted me a photograph of his buttocks... harumph harumph..."

I do not accept that idea.(I.E.: " It is to be twisted through the "commerce clause" to meet any and all social needs";that will guarantee votes for a certain unnamed "party"...

Just Wondering?

Did anyone really take the time to watch the video that the OP linked to regarding what Iceland is really doing?

I mean this is a perfectly democratic way of reaching out to their people and having a flow of ideas come together about what they think is good for them in the 21st century. Open to all to see.

I think it is what is needed here,,,
Input,,,,,not just from Representatives,,, but the People
What is wrong with that? I know that most in America are Sheeple,,, and stupid to boot,, and there would be some tremendously dumb ideas,,, but we have the ability to sort through the crap and use some of the Fine minds that do exist here in USA for a change.

Anyway,,,, seems simple to me.
Let the People Speak,
Then Heard by each other,
Then Use that as a basis for what to go forward with,,, I am sure that Most of the Ideas of the Constitution would be reborn,,, just clarified more In my opinion.
Use the technology we have to make us the better Nation we can be,,,
Where is the Vision? Not in Congress.
I think a good influx of Ideas, is what is needed to cure what ails us,,,,
Don't be afraid to move forward people or you will be left behind holding onto your piece of paper,,,, because that is all it is at the moment,,, since our government has been taken over by Big Bank/Corporations and Special Interest groups,,,,, not to mention other nations anyway.
Wake up people this is what is needed,,, ,, Stand up and say Enough and help to create the World we Want,,,
Unless you think that Congress is working for you? Really?

reply to post by 46ACE

One more time "it" is fine; "it" is not enforced

Name me one time in American history when the constitution was enforced.



You guys live in a fantasy world, where governments do good things. Too bad that type of world has never existed.

Originally posted by Maslo
Because I consider automatically getting US citizenship just by being born on US soil to be quite absurd and unsystemic.

The United States observes birthright citizenship for historical and ideological reasons.

Anyone born in the United States, regardless of sex, color, race, faith, or even the character of the parents, is afforded all the protections and rights embodied in and encompassed by the Constitution, deserves these and an equal chance at the American dream just as the child of citizens.

I can’t think of many other things that fundamentally represent the ideals of our nation’s foundation, the Constitution and what it stands for, as this concept does.

There is no point in having birtright citizenship at all, it only serves to generate anchor babies. Most countries in the world do not have birtright citizenship, and they are fine.

Yep, and those countries don’t have illegal immigrants. /sarcasm

Ending birthright citizenship will not fix the illegal immigration problem. Illegal immigrants come here looking for a better life for themselves and their children. They would continue to do so even if there was no birthright citizenship.

Abolishing birthright citizenship would then, not fix the illegal immigration problem, and in my opinion conflict with the ideals this nation stands for.

As the Supreme Court said in Plyer v. Doe—

[T]hose who elect to enter our territory by stealth and in violation of our law should be prepared to bear the consequences, including, but not limited to, deportation. But the children of those illegal entrants are not comparably situated. Their “parents have the ability to conform their conduct to societal norms,” and presumably the ability to remove themselves from the State's jurisdiction; but the children ... in these cases “can affect neither their parents' conduct nor their own status.”

Even if the State found it expedient to control the conduct of adults by acting against their children, legislation directing the onus of a parent’s misconduct against his children does not comport with fundamental conceptions of justice.

[V]isiting ... condemnation on the head of an infant is illogical and unjust. Moreover, imposing disabilities on the ... child is contrary to the basic concept of our system that legal burdens should bear some relationship to individual responsibility or wrongdoing. Obviously, no child is responsible for his birth and penalizing the ... child is an ineffectual — as well as unjust — way of deterring the parent.

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by 46ACE

 

One more time "it" is fine; "it" is not enforced

Name me one time in American history when the constitution was enforced.

You guys live in a fantasy world, where governments do good things. Too bad that type of world has never existed.

edit on 21-6-2011 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)

Believe me I am no advocate of govt. Which is why I am a passionate advocate of the limitations on its powers placed by the(old/"moldy")constitution.


Try:the"21 st amendment": repealed the18th amendment.( prohibition)

Or the 13th ( abolishing slavery...)



Most every federal court case.Certainly every supreme court case swings on the courts interpretation of the constitution.
Everytime an alleged criminal is read his"miranda warnings..."upon arrest (?)

reply to post by Rockdisjoint


no one will argue that is bad now but without that constitution it can be a whole lot worse.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
Just Wondering?

Did anyone really take the time to watch the video that the OP linked to regarding what Iceland is really doing?

Okay fair enough I stopped;put my coffee down flipped back to the o.p.and watched the video just for you.

The amendment process already exists. I have zero faith in my fellow citizens thinking past their own next meal the "new" Camaro; "jersey shore and "American idol; The current shallow depraved shortsighted (however 'modern" ) culture sucks.

Ill informed People think: "Mob rule" (i.e. "majority rule" is what we are based on:
Evidenced by: "He won get over it!" we are not based on "consensus" and" The majority rules"We have laws setup to protect rights of the minority)..

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
I mean this is a perfectly democratic way of reaching out to their people and having a flow of ideas come together about what they think is good for them in the 21st century. Open to all to see.

I think it is what is needed here,,,
Input,,,,,not just from Representatives,,, but the People
What is wrong with that? I know that most in America are Sheeple,,, and stupid to boot,, and there would be some tremendously dumb ideas,,, but we have the ability to sort through the crap

Do we? REALLY? Mcdonalds was successfully(?) sued because some lady put hot coffee in a styrofoam cup between her thighs at the drive through and splashed herself.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23

and use some of the Fine minds that do exist here in USA for a change.

Anyway,,,, seems simple to me.
Let the People Speak,
Then Heard by each other,
Then Use that as a basis for what to go forward with,,, I am sure that Most of the Ideas of the Constitution would be reborn,,, just clarified more In my opinion.
Use the technology we have to make us the better Nation we can be,,,
Where is the Vision? Not in Congress.
I think a good influx of Ideas, is what is needed to cure what ails us,,,,
Don't be afraid to move forward people or you will be left behind holding onto your piece of paper,,,, because that is all it is at the moment,,, since our government has been taken over by Big Bank/Corporations and Special Interest groups,,,,, not to mention other nations anyway.
Wake up people this is what is needed,,, ,, Stand up and say Enough and help to create the World we Want,,,
Unless you think that Congress is working for you? Really?

This is the "scariest" reason here:
And I bet the thought that even your supposedly "OPEN and PUBLIC" process would be corrupted by those reaching for even more power; never entered your mind...(?)

* May 6, 2008
* 0 Comments

Hacking American Idol
Overzealous fans as well as Idol-haters have discovered their own ways to give contestants an advantage: by hacking the voting process.
" hacking American idol" pc mag:


Twenty-five million viewers continue to tune in each week and vote for their favorites by telephone and/or text message. And year after year, the phones are jammed with hundreds of thousands of fans calling in at the same time. Text messaging is the easier voting option, but that's (perhaps unfairly) limited to AT&T subscribers. The reality is that no matter how many times viewers try to vote, it's inevitable that a limited number of calls will go through in just a two-hour time span—leaving your favorite contestant in jeopardy.

As a result, overzealous fans as well as Idol-haters have invented their own ways to give their favorite (or loathed) contestants an advantage: by hacking the voting process. emphasis mine. And with the stakes higher this season than ever before (someone has to make up for Hick's failed career and the disaster that is William Hung), the final four—David Archuleta, Jason Castro, David Cook, and Syesha Mercado—need your votes.

Editors' Note: Please keep in mind that the following hacking techniques are to be used at your own risk, and PC Magazine doesn't endorse their use. According to the American Idol Web site, the staff conducts weekly monitoring of all the votes coming in, and reserves the right to remove any identified power dialers.

Known as "phreaking" (or "phone freaking"), viewers can utilize speed-dialing software and hardware to skew the votes, not to mention tie up the lines so that other voters have a harder time getting through. There are several speed-dialing programs out there, both free and paid.

www.pcmag.com...

reply to post by 46ACE


I never said I wanted to Vote through a medium such as Facebook, or phone in my vote, I just said it was Time for some Fresh Ideas to be pumped into the behemoth monster we call our Government. Yes, I understand completely that those who wish more power would have a field day with something that was not well thought out.
The problem being,,, no one is suggesting any alternatives? Work within the system,,, sure,,, I would if I had a big enough pocketbook,, we all know the Laws are brokered to the highest bidder now-a-days. Ever heard of PACs
Sure, it is going to be a mess, but I don't think any messier than what we are dealing with today in Government.
Our Congress sucks eggs, and everyone knows it, Somehow the Government Monster has to be reduced to the simple basics of what it is meant to do,,, and doesn't at this time. There is way too much in the hands of Big Business and the Banks,, it has to stop somehow,,, how do you propose to do this?
They aren't letting go of their meal ticket. I say starve them,,,, but dumb americans,,, as you stated can't think beyond today.

I also would abhor Mob Rule that could be instituted by 'democratic' means. The protection of the Minority is basic to my ideas, But still ,, the Basics of What we want in America could be Updated easily and within the system if we dared, but as you say,,, with all the brain dead/damaged out there today,, it would be an uphill battle. I believe it has failed, so on to the next way to accomplish this,,, I am open for sound suggestions.
Given Everything here, I think we would agree that our system is broken, regardless of having the 'ammendment process' in place, that also is to cumbersome and not expedient enough to meet the demands of such a fast changing society as we live in today. 100 years ago,,, yea it might have worked fine,,, today Not.

(edit)and thanks for actually watching the Video you have to admit,, amazing what they are doing in Iceland.

reply to post by EarthCitizen23

Given Everything here, I think we would agree that our system is broken, regardless of having the 'ammendment process' in place, that also is to cumbersome and not expedient enough to meet the demands of such a fast changing society as we live in today. 100 years ago,,, yea it might have worked fine,,, today Not.

The system isn't broken because a document wasn't clever enough to prevent the system from breaking, the system is broken because all closed systems tend towards entropy. The Constitution for the United States of America did not create a closed system, and the regular regime changes that occur in this country, and peacefully so, is unprecedented in human history.

The system is broken because far too many individuals have acquiesced to tyranny. This acquiescence is amplified by the woeful belief that a new document will fix the problem. Whatever greatness once existed in the American psyche, today far too many of us are nothing more than sacrificial lambs at the alter of tyranny. We solemnly accept the commands and dictates our priest class lawyer set demand of us, and we - like any good religious adherent - suffer grandly.

What is the answer? Look into your heart, use your mind for critical thought, and do what you need to do as an individual to ensure your own freedom...or, you can wait for others to do it on your behalf...and wait, and wait, and wait, because don't you know? They're waiting on you to do it on their behalf.

update the U.S. Constitution?

First you will need to wash all the brown off of it as it became a big wad of toilet paper for all the presidents.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen23
reply to post by 46ACE

 

I never said I wanted to Vote through a medium such as Facebook, or phone in my vote, I just said it was Time for some Fresh Ideas to be pumped into the behemoth monster we call our Government. Yes, I understand completely that those who wish more power would have a field day with something that was not well thought out.
The problem being,,, no one is suggesting any alternatives? Work within the system,,, sure,,, I would if I had a big enough pocketbook,, we all know the Laws are brokered to the highest bidder now-a-days. Ever heard of PACs
Sure, it is going to be a mess, but I don't think any messier than what we are dealing with today in Government.
Our Congress sucks eggs, and everyone knows it, Somehow the Government Monster has to be reduced to the simple basics of what it is meant to do,,, and doesn't at this time. There is way too much in the hands of Big Business and the Banks,, it has to stop somehow,,, how do you propose to do this?
They aren't letting go of their meal ticket. I say starve them,,,, but dumb americans,,, as you stated can't think beyond today.

I also would abhor Mob Rule that could be instituted by 'democratic' means. The protection of the Minority is basic to my ideas, But still ,, the Basics of What we want in America could be Updated easily and within the system if we dared, but as you say,,, with all the brain dead/damaged out there today,, it would be an uphill battle. I believe it has failed, so on to the next way to accomplish this,,, I am open for sound suggestions.
Given Everything here, I think we would agree that our system is broken, regardless of having the 'ammendment process' in place, that also is to cumbersome and not expedient enough to meet the demands of such a fast changing society as we live in today. 100 years ago,,, yea it might have worked fine,,, today Not.

(edit)and thanks for actually watching the Video you have to admit,, amazing what they are doing in Iceland.

edit on 6/21/2011 by EarthCitizen23 because: last thought of thanks to 46ACE

Seems like most here; once we get down to brass tacks; we actually agree on more than we disagree on. I don't know how to reign in the banks.I think it starts with Ron Paul's audit. Progresses to a justice dept not corrupted or influenced from the top.Perhaps a few thousand gallons of hot tar and a semi truckload of chicken feathers? As seemingly little of this financial "booty raping" was blatantly illegal.
at the time. Perhaps a noose and a horse or two.They better get a handle on this or we are going to be forced into world gubbermint submission which plenty of folks here think can't be all bad(?)But will bring unprecedented bloodshed and life crushing imposed control...

You know the worst part about this kid is his isolation from reality.What's a good example of enforcement of the Constitution What's a good one......ah,the right people used it to stop discrimination that was utterly pointless and degrading.
The presidents hasn't ordered all of us on ATS killed or imprisoned,nobody has the right to kill you because you wear blue pants and finally In the military they only have UCMJ and 70% of America would flip out under that kind of life.
I don't want them to ever be able to try that with us.
Don't even try to change one word but clearly define them legally by direct definition and get rid of the "Naval"legal system and use a system where you don't have to master a foreign language to speak for yourself the very deliberate obfuscation of the Constitution is the question here.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


I like what you have to say, and for the most part agree.

Please amplify and say more to this... I enjoyed the clarity.

As for myself,,, constantly looking within ,,, have the Freedom there,,, it is outside in our society I am working hard to maintain and keep it.

Will read and reread your words as I can see something of substance in what you say. Then I will respond more to what you are saying.
Great thoughts.

reply to post by EarthCitizen23

Please amplify and say more to this... I enjoyed the clarity.

No legal document anywhere will ever provide freedom. Freedom can not be granted, and the very nature of the grant implies tyranny.

Today, public schools, and now very likely private schools, teach their students that what "makes" us free is the ability to elect our "leaders".

Unalienable rights have been replaced with the sacred cow of civil rights. Civil rights are legal rights, and legal rights are granted rights. What can be granted can be taken away. Unalienable rights cannot be taken away, they can only be trampled upon.

I made reference to the priest class lawyer set, but they are not the only priest class that has insidiously permeated the social psyche. Modern scientists pay lip service to the scientific method, then turn around and use their credentials to push forth their own agenda, gleefully embracing their bias as if this bias is more informed than the laity because it comes with credentials.

The beast of credentialism reared its ugly head more than a hundred years ago, and today if you want to go into business for yourself, far too many people will advise you that the first thing you need to do is go to the local IRS office and obtain a "tax I.D. number". If you ask why on earth you would need a "tax I.D. number" for a business that hasn't yet generated a single dime in profit, these people will "inform" you that you cannot get a license without a "tax I.D. number". If you ask in all honesty why on earth you would need a license to do business, the cognitive dissonance will kick in and varying answers will fly like pigs with wings.

Years ago, and I will never forget this moment, I walked past an independent bookstore that had a huge sign announcing that they were a "licensed bookseller". I thought to myself; "Thank the Lord Almighty that the city has endeavored to protect me from the dangers of books. God only knows what type of dangerous ideas might be sold without such license."

The medical field today in the United States is one of the most regulated fields in the marketplace, and yet iatrogenocide is the third largest killer of Americans in the U.S. Iatrogenocide is death by doctoring.

A recent study published in The Joumal of The American Medical Association 2000:284:94); by Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH showed that in the US, this data was found:

12,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery
7,000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals
20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals
80,000 deaths/year from nosocomial infections in hospitals
106,000 deaths/year from adverse effects of medications

This totals 225,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes, placing iatrogeny as the third leading cause of death in the US, second only to heart disease and cancer. The scary part is that this does not include disabilities and disorders, just deaths in hospitalised patients.

www.congregator.net...

This is in regards to licensed doctors and health care professionals. In the meantime the vaunted FDA is doing all it can to reign in the "alternative medicine" crowd by demanding more regulations as if the regulations we have in place today have done anything other than close systems and contribute to an aggregation of power.

We fall prey to the utterances of mystical incantations of the priest class set every step of the way, and without question accept dubious terms such as "alternative medicine" when our rational mind knows full well that there can be no such thing as "alternative" medicine, and that it is either medicine, or it is not.

This sloppy syllogism carries the day, and the rule of law we are taught is the foundation of our nation, has been chucked in favor of rule by law.

We have imprudently agreed to equate legislation with law, as if a piece of paper can be law. Yet a constitution, statute, or ordinance can be no more law than a map can be the territory or a word can be the thing it defines. People such as I will come along and passionately make the case for rational self interest, and a flurry of emotional sycophants of tyranny will meet my passion with their own passion for irrational collectivism.

It is understandable that the individual will seek out others to enhance their own survival, but hardly understandable at all when the others seek to subjugate this individual in the name of collectivism. Collectivists will smugly pat themselves on the back and declare themselves defenders of classes, or groups, and even at times pretend they are advocates of the minority, but the simple fact of the matter is that there is no greater minority than the individual.

While you, as an individual, are indeed a minority, you are essential to any group you belong to. Conversely, any group you belong to is not nearly as essential. You can survive without the group, the group cannot exist without participation from individuals. This is the first, and most self evident power of the individual.

Beyond this power, the individual holds at all times inherent political power, and of course, certain unalienable rights. Groups can, and indeed do have rights, but group rights cannot exist unless that right is first demonstrated to be an individual right.

Rights are natural law, and function in the same way that all natural law does. Law is simple, true, universal and absolute. Gravity did not come into play because Isaac Newton wrote it down on paper, and individual rights do not exist because someone wrote them down on paper.

Rights exist for all creatures great and small. The rose does not need a Congress of roses in order to derive the right to keep and bear thorns. The porcupine does not need a decree from a king in order to derive the right to keep and bear needles and the skunk does not need permission from the state in order to spew it stink. These creatures have the self evident unalienable right to defend their lives to the best of their ability, and need no permission from any other creature in order to do so.

No one needs permission to be free, and seeking out permission for freedom is the same as seeking bondage. Those who seek permission will find plenty of despots and tyrants more than willing to grant, or deny this permission, but those who seek actual freedom will be hard pressed to find many willing to agree to their freedom. It must be taken and fiercely fought for. If you do not take your own freedom and claim it as yours, it is guaranteed someone else will come along and take it from you.