Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Amending the Constitution

BobTurner
Posts: 114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2014 3:19:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If you had the power to amend the Constitution, or to propose an amendment, what would you offer?

I'll get this started:

28th Amendment: Corporations are not people and money isn't speech. All political elections must be 100% publicly subsidized and subject to laws passed by the United States Government and the states.

29th Amendment: Neither the United States Government, nor any state may discriminate against a person on the basis of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, nationality, gender identity or socioeconomic class. All levels of government must enforce against public and private intrusions of this right.

30th Amendment: The right to privacy is fundamental, and may not be impinged on by the United States Government or the states. At all levels of government, this right must be regarded as sacrosanct, whether it be in reference to public or private intrusions.

31st Amendment: The United States Government must provide for a living wage irrespective of a person's level of employment. To this end, it must also provide a right to universal education, healthcare, and basic utilities.

32nd Amendment: No member of the United States Congress may serve longer than 8 years. Terms in both the House of Representatives and the United States Senate will last four years, effective in all elections after the date of this amendment's ratification. Any elected representative who has served over 12 years or will serve over 12 years after reelection may seek reelection.

So, a summary:

1. Enshrined positive freedom into the Constitution for the first time, including equal protection for sexual orientation and gender identity and positive rights to healthcare, education, and a living wage.
2. Banned private campaign donations.
3. Established term limits.
4. Banned NSA spying and encroachments upon Roe v. Wade et al.
Kanti
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2014 5:53:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I don't know if you were inviting criticism, but I would just like to point out a couple of concerns I have with your methodology.


28th Amendment: Corporations are not people and money isn't speech. All political elections must be 100% publicly subsidized and subject to laws passed by the United States Government and the states.


First, I agree with you idealistically on this amendment. You're cutting to the core of campaign finance, and the over-saturation of the market. It will eventually all come tumbling down once they figure out the mechanics of it.

What you're are saying is corporations are not people therefore they're not guaranteed rights under constitution. Now let me present you with a hypothetical.

I'm a business owner, and I practice my religion every moment of my life. Most people would agree you don't turn off your religion. It's in all your action and every consequence of those actions.

As a religious person choose to close early so my workers can spend more time with their family. I choose to close on Sunday so my workers can worship or spend time with their family. I choose not to sell ham because I'm Jewish. I choose to not offer vaccinations. I reject to the collection of social security taxes because I live in a religious community that takes care of their elders after they can no longer work(Amish communities do this, and the government has actually granted them an exemption from paying taxes.).

And what your amendment would say is when you enter commerce you no longer have the right to live a religious life which is completely against the Constitution. Over the past 100 years we have actually passed laws to protect workers from religious discrimination from their employers you can't then discriminate against religious employers UNLESS there's a 3rd party that would be harmed if the business wasn't denied their right to practice, and then the government has a compelling interest to get involved.

Like I said I agree with the idea of your amendment but I think saying corporations are not people would put on the entire population of business owners/shareholders(who are people) restrictions that would violate their 1st amendment rights.

30th Amendment: The right to privacy is fundamental, and may not be impinged on by the United States Government or the states. At all levels of government, this right must be regarded as sacrosanct, whether it be in reference to public or private intrusions.

Yet again you're working yourself into a corner.

Would you say that known pedophile who collects child pornography through the internet is guaranteed privacy?

What about when a person is on public property? Does the government not have a responsibility to monitor activities that take place on public property?

Lastly and I'm sure you wont agree but what about confirmed participants in violent terrorism? Doesn't the government have some responsibility to protect it's citizens from the actions of terrorist networks that communicate through telephones and internet?

Yet again idealistically I agree with you. The Snowden leaks woke the country up to the elaborate methods of data collection by the government. And this is only the ground floor of their capabilities. They're building a massive data collection facility in Utah too We can accomplish the spirit of this amendment by repealing the Patriot Act. That would put an end to justified intrusion through the guise of counter-terorism. Ultimately there are some cases when intrusion is not only justifiable but morally necessary.

29th Amendment: Neither the United States Government, nor any state may discriminate against a person on the basis of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, nationality, gender identity or socioeconomic class. All levels of government must enforce against public and private intrusions of this right.

I think this amendment is good idea, but aren't you technically restating the preamble of the Constitution.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

This statement echoes throughout the Constitution.

14th amendment guarantees equal protection under the law.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

The Civil Rights Act of 1968 actually made it a crime to threaten of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere anyone defined in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Matthew Shepard Act added actual or perceived gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability to the federal definition.

Do you see how you might be restating?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2014 5:02:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
So, a summary:
BobTurner hates liberty and wants to enslave us all to his socialist visions. Except maybe in the bedroom. But everywhere else, put the manacales on.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2014 5:02:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
*manacles*
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.