Thread: The Coming Storm

No matter what, it is extremely difficult to achieve a significant amount of agreement in order to amend a country's constitution. Canada knows how difficult it can be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meech_...constitutional

Bob

To be honest, I read Nelson’s opening and got a sense of direction this thread would take and decided to skip to the current page. So, based strictly on the thread title and to add a little levity to the discussion, I just finished washing and waxing my truck, it’s monsoon season here in southern Arizona and the storm is rolling in...

Yes same here in New Mexico. Storms every day.

Switzerland has it figured out. The have hundreds of amendments to their constitution which is modeled after the one in the U.S. Every Swiss citizen is expected to vote on the amendments and they do it constantly. They have a Semi-democracy except for a couple of cantons which are actually a pure democracy.

Rock and roll every afternoon here..

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

There is a big assumption that the Constitution is a "dead" document meaning it's written in stone and that's it, game over. Another opinion is that it is a live document and the founding fathers intended for it to be altered to meet the needs of the population.

Since they are all dead we don't know what their intentions were. Yea, it's like the bible. You can find passages to support just about anything. There is no shortage of opinions either way.

In keeping with the tone of this thread I'm keeping what I said neutral. As they say you buy your ticket and you take your ride.

The Constitution, assuming it is unchanging for a moment, even then lives, because every day we strive to embody the spirit of it's declarations, just as the Bible lives because it is an inspiration for human action through the passage of time. The 'dead document/living document' argument is false distinction used for political purpose and nothing more.

Now quite probably the Founding Fathers wanted amendments *in addition* to the articles already therein, entirely plausible being as though they created the mechanisms to amend the document, but that isn't what the politicians seem to be arguing over half of the time, but unleashing government power to restrict us. The Founding Fathers were influenced by ideas of natural law, that we have rights by nature that we can discover by the intellect. This type of philosophy is inconsistent with the restriction of already discovered rights (if you ascribe to natural law). Yet if you don't ascribe the only thing one is really left with is power, who has it, and what they feel like you should be allowed to do.

That's my two cents on that. Over and out. Catch you all in the rest of the forum

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

There is a big assumption that the Constitution is a "dead" document meaning it's written in stone and that's it, game over. Another opinion is that it is a live document and the founding fathers intended for it to be altered to meet the needs of the population.

Since they are all dead we don't know what their intentions were.

Actually they left their intentions in many documents if one chooses to read them
Much of the thoughts that went into their decisions are there to be read//

Of course many just don't really care, but you asked about the coming storm, and if anything will make it worse it is the loss of the idea of America being a nation of laws...

Just one source

https://www.founders.archives.gov/


If you want a warning to watch for, look for a Constitutional Convention of the States, we are surprisingly close to having one... If started, one never really knows what could come up for a vote on making new amendments or eliminating old ones..

I will defer to my good pal Colonel Kemp..
https://youtu.be/buvSIrFi0Hw

(hot-off-the-presses-article in NRO) Forecast for the SEC: Storm’s a Comin’

You are correct about a Constitutional Convention of the states however the issue is what states are having mock conventions to plan for pushing through agendas.

In keeping with the original intent of this thread I will refrain from discussing specific states or agendas. You can all research that on your own.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

You are correct about a Constitutional Convention of the states however the issue is what states are having mock conventions to plan for pushing through agendas.

In keeping with the original intent of this thread I will refrain from discussing specific states or agendas. You can all research that on your own.

I think ANY CCoS will be bad, it doesn't much matter who finally gets the numbers to hold one, any Constitutional changes can be proposed during one, I think that is where the danger really lays. I didn't actually understand that was completely open to proposals, I always thought the states that opened it controlled the agenda.

You could literally have a proposal to repeal the women's vote, we know it won't pass, but can you imagine the ire even proposing it would cause, I just used that as an example...