May 30, 2006
-
Constitution
If you could go back in time and have the founding fathers write one more issue into the constitution, what would you want them to write?
If you could go back in time and have the founding fathers write one more issue into the constitution, what would you want them to write?
Comments (168)
That’s a tough one, I don’t know if I have a good answer. I’ll have to think about it…
Free pez for everyone.
3rd!!!
That race would never be an issue – that all would be truly equal.
WHAT’S THE POINT? THE GOVERNMENT DOESNT FOLLOW THE STUFF WRITEN IN THERE NOW
no gays
Did they leave anything out?
Candy worship required….me…not edible candy…get it??
Boy Dan, some sicko found your site by searching the internet for 15 year old DD boobs…then followed that link to my site…I love the new xanga footprints….
I don’t have coherent brain thoughts today, how could you ask this hard of a question today!! lol
I have no clue I am sure my hubby will later lol
Not American. Can’t comment. And I’m so near the top too.
hm…. perhaps a better definition of what they meant by separation of church and state.
and perhaps slightly better check & balances, to help guarantee that none of the three branches would eventually become stronger than the other two (or be able to do something the other two branches could not change)
Though I do have to agree with Sickboy’s comment above…
RYC: I have never had as many referrals from one site as I have from yours…you bring me about 15 or so new visitors a day! lol…I’m not complaining…I just thought that one was kind of sick and people just don’t even realize their ISP gets so easily tracked:)
I agree with gretchenly, but about the first amendment. Separation of church and state is nowhere to be found in the Constitution. Only in a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote. The first amendment says that Congress shall not make a national religion, or prohibit the free exercise of religion. But today…we’re taking the idea of separation of church and state, mixing it with the wrong notions about the first amendment, and prohibiting religion in certain public areas and in the government. It’s totally off-base with what the Founding Fathers believed.
They should have been more clear about what some of the things meant.
Mandatory nap time during the work day for everyone!!
I would have them be just a little bit less concise with the amendments so that “separation of church and state,” gun control, the right to privacy, and other absurd extrapolations couldn’t have been “found” by revisionist jurists.
I think they did a pretty good job……….nothing to add or subtract.
I like the Constitution, just as it is and wish it were followed a little more closely.
. . .But if I had my way, it would be abundantly clear that the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” applied to everyone. Just as African Americans were excluded from the ‘liberty and pursuit of happiness’ part at one time, the unborn are now excluded from the ‘right to life.’
I think they did a great job, lots of foresight. I wouldn’t add a thing. I just think we need to follow what’s there.
I’d introduce some additional check on the power of the courts, though I’m not sure how. They have been allowed to essentially write new laws from the bench, which has been a problem lately.
I would want specifics dammit! everyone’s interpretation is different and each part is being stretched far too thin.. but alas back then they didnt have the rediculous idiots of today
Make voting mandatory for state representatives mandatory for citizens (male/female) between 18-21.
Church/State seperatation. Abortion = murder, something about homosexuality marriage.
GREAT QUESTION…I DON’T THINK THEY MISSED ANYTHING, I JUST THINK THEY SHOULD TWEAK THE ONES WE ALREADY HAVE! BUT MAYBE THEY COULD DO AWAY WITH THE RIGHT TO BE A MORON…JOKING LOL!
Specifics would be good too.
I’m not familiar with your constituation since I’m Canadian
hahaha I like that stupid comment up there “no gays”. If they write it in the constituation that’ll make everyone heterosexual, law abiding individuals won’t it?
no idea dan! hard question!
I don’t know…..I think they did a pretty good job considering!
no fat chicks j/k j/k i would want them to make it mandatory for us to be completely selfsufficient within our own country and make it ok for us to take over other countries to make that possible
“Though I do have to agree with Sickboy’s comment above… ” – Building_A_Mystery
Yep. Sad but so very true.
I’d make it so that we don’t respect any religion at all and run the country entirely secular with no mention of any religion or invisible god. Just kidding. Calm down sheeple! Enjoy your opiates.
This is hard. Probably something about how there should never be someone with the last name Bush in the White House.
“Church/State seperatation. Abortion = murder, something about homosexuality marriage.” – weirdbean
Besides your own fear of “teh gays getting married!”, how would that benefit anyone? Oh yeah. God would be pissed. *rolls eyes*
“no gays”
Posted 5/30/2006 at 8:20 AM by HealerMatthiax
Wow. Specific! To the point!
I hope you get gay kids, just as payback.
Actually, I don’t. You might kill them.
I would just have them make it a little more clear… it can all be so vague sometimes and often misunderstood.
I agree with anotherhousewife.
I’d say something to reign in on activist judges. Roe v. Wade, Lawrence v. Texas, and so forth are cases where courts have gone against laws enacted by elected politicians because they personally were opposed to them. Now if such rulings were a result of going with a literal interpretation of the Constitution it wouldn’t be a problem. But too often judges look to international law, and their own personal feelings instead of just doign their job and interpreting the law of the land.
Free beer and hookers for everyone… If anything needs to be guaranteed to citizens, it’s that…
I AGREE WITH DISTUBRING_THE_UNIVERSE!
I WOULD MAKE IT SO THAT EVERYONE COMES TO THE FQC (FUN QUESTIONS CAFE) AND ANSWERS MY DAMNED QUESTIONS OR GETS RABIES AND SHOT!
To install double the amount of womens bathrooms to men’s bathrooms in a public place. It’s a pain in the ass waiting in line all the time when your bladder is FULL!
i’m canadian, so i dont know, but i think it’s disgusting that someone put “no gays”.
I think they should have actually written in the right to privacy. Modern society is reminding me more and more of Nazi Germany – “Papers Please!”
I seriously hope HealerMatthiax is kidding.
Anyway, two people can be married as long as they are at the age of consent, they are not related, and that they are PEOPLE (not a person and an animal…not that same-sex marriage is equivalent to beastiality).
“This is your mission if you choose to accept it … this message will self destruct in 200 years or so.”
People who are 65 or older should be required to take the driving test once a year to make sure they are still in good health to drive. I know this sounds weird, but seriously, I mean, I have 3 grandparents (my 2 grandpas and a grandma) who have no business driving, but they still have their driver’s licenses! For example, I have a grandpa who has cataracts in one of his eyes and then his vision in his other eye is horrible. He can still drive and the few times I have been in a vehicle with him were insane! That’s just my opinion though.
It is not something that needs to be added or otherwise.
I myself would have advocated Mandatory military Service…but that’s just cause I’m friends with Rabble_Rouser_911
~Akania
“No gays”…ahhh the children of the world…from Germany no less. Had a feeling I’d find a couple like that. lol
The constitution should not limit the rights of its people. So instead, a little clarity would just be nice. We can’t possibly know what exactly they were thinking back then, even just 200 years ago, when they wrote it, and they certainly could not have expected what would happen over the next 200 years.
Well, I’m sure they didn’t think that this was any more than common sense, but it would be better now if they had put something specific in there that said the Constitution was to be interpreted literally.
gay peeps get married
make it harder to write amendments
ooh and im with sing Your Glory; go conservatives!
Make it illegal to ban gay marriage
An unalienable right to life.
I agree with ronlawhouston actually.
I agree with a lot of the comments about the need for defining, more clearly, what is written. So many have taken liberties with those words. But, no matter how perfectly a document or law is written, if someone wants to, they will always find a way to bend it and shape it to their specific needs.
I’d just like them to clarify the separation of church and state and all that stuff that goes with it
RYC: yeah, we were being a bunch of tards, lol, you’re SUPPOSED to stay in the boat, where there are no rapids and it’s safe, instead of spending half the trip throwing each other out of it. Oh well
I can’t think of anything. It’s too early. Obviously, I’d like some specifics on what they meant and didn’t mean by certain clauses (free speech, establishment of religion, etc.).
Oh. Duh. Others before me were right: I’d make the races and sexes equal in the eyes of the law.
I’d also get rid of slavery right from the start, tinker with the electoral college idea, and develop some sort of (clearly defined) constitutional immigration policy.
But imposing 21st century ideas on 18th century America probably wouldn’t have worked too well. May as well ask what would happen if you teleported the Constitutional Convention into the 21st century. Lots of people would freak out and die; in which case America wouldn’t [be / have been] born, and we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.
I wrote a post on the LEGAL AGE OF CONSENT, if anybody likes taboo topics, this one I have to admit, intrigues me.
well.. they wrote it to be flexible and yet hard to change cause they wanted it to apply to the future as well as the past. it’s worked so far and people complain about it not being followed but it was never meant to be a strict set of rules anyways.. just a few guidelines for the government to start with…
I would have them start off with some of the amendments they made later. Not necessarily the exact amendment, but perhaps making the issue more spelled out in the body of the constitution itself, so that there would have been less question about it later. The race issue, for example, or marriage.
something about racism…there are still so many racists and i admit, i tend to become one at times, depending on what kind of race the person who cut me off was.
What is actually in the Constitution is irrelevant these days. It’s second only to the Bible in the number of misinterpretations of its original meaning.
How would I have them write it? Hold a gun to their wigged heads?
I’m with stickboy.. what’s the point.
I honestly wouldn’t add a thing.
I think some of the forefathers did want to get specific, but decided that it would be better to lay down common laws of the land, so that we could function better.
Besides, some of the forefathers had no idea that we would be facing so many different issues now. The issues they dealt with were MUCH different than the ones we deal with on a day to day basis anyway.
~Caroline~
Maybe the constitution should have something in it about Immigration
are we doing constitution or bill of rights folks? hmm, i’d make PASSING a USA history course mandatory.
I like the Constitution the way it is.
No slavery and all should be treated equal and fair.
No more than 2 Starbucks are allowed on one block.
Larry
The founding fathers claimed that the system of checks and balances they created would work only if Americans remained a “morally upright” nation. Regardless of religion or standard, anyone on earth can point out that Americans are not really “morally upright” anymore.
So there’s discomfort in the laws because the documents are now outdated. The constitution we actually need today is one that fits the new America, which is much less concerned with Christian morals.
I would have asked that the founders write in that the constitution be rewritten every so often; perhaps 20 to 50 years.
abortion or gay marriage
That the U.S. Constitution is expressly founded upon, and incorporates by reference, the principles announced in the Declaration of Independence
I’d have them remove the “General Welfare” clause. Other than that, it’s pretty much perfect.
Although Laserlawyer has a good idea too.
I would also have them expressly mention secession (implied by the 10th Amendment).
The constitution is a master piece. The fact that its ideas and guidelines can still be put into effect 200 years after it was created proves it. Guess if you HAD to throw something in there it would be the death penalty for any politician guilty of perjury, conspiracy, libel, slander, obstruction of justice and/or evidence, use of party funds for personal use, and basically any form of dishonesty/deception. Garaunteed if we had a law like that the government would be much more efficient and be run by outstanding citizens and not spoiled, power-hungry, corrupt fools. Leaders should lead by example… not through manipulation and lies…
I would have them write something to the effect that anyone who takes God out of schools and public places and witholds a persons right to exercize their beliefs by praying in public and all kinds of stuff like that should be deported immediately and their citizenship revoked…and while I was at it I would make very strict very definite rules about immigration.
Children should have equal rights.
If we had the responsibility to vote and do things adults do like support ourselves and family, the children in our society wouldn’t be so stupid.
I think today we have kids who won’t even open a book, but if our Founding Fathers made it that children were equal to adults, thing’s would be totally different. They could go to school and support themselves, vote, drive, etc.
No point in adding to the constitution, if the people in power already ignore and/or twist it to suit their own purposes. Tacking an extra amendment on that would be like putting a band-aid on top of a gaping wound.
Like what Sickboy said.
Follow what’s already written there?
How about a cap on politicians salaries? inflation adjustable of course
maybe if they made less money, we’d actually get people who really care as opposed to those just looking for power
Put more strengent limitations on taxation.
Gay rights.
homosexuality should be illegal and not promoted in any way. those who practice it shall be persecuted.
Hey, God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for it (spelling?), why should we be any different?
Ban slavery…
it wasn’t even that profitable until 1793 when Eli whitney created his cotton gin.
Put in voting rights allow non-propertied males to vote
I’d be sure there were equal rights clearly written in there no matter color, gender, religion, sexual preference, etc. Do you realize how much farther along our country and world would be if we had started out everyone equally, and one minority didn’t have to struggle for freedom every 30 years?
ALTHOUGH I STICK FIRM TO WHAT I SAID EARLIER IM GONNA HAVE TO AGREE WITH KYJO IN SOME SORT OF SICK WAY HE HAS A POINT. A GOVERNMENT RUN WITHOUT “GOD” BACKING IT WOULD BE NICE. IM SICK OF GOD WILLING THE DECISIONS OF BUSH. WE ARE NOT ALL CHRISTIAN IN THIS COUNTRY, SOMETHING HE MIGHT WANT TO REMEMBER.
that gays and lesbians could get married.
some hint that the constitution itself may need to be thrown away in time far in the future, if society has changed to make liberty an obsolete value.
Ahh, maybe the prohibition of owning any humans…. yah, something like that.
i think were doing pretty good, i actually wouldn’t change it. = D
There should be an hour that everyone has to wash their dogs.
The government’s purpose is to guide and support the people by taking action that is beneficial for ALL of it’s citizens and those who support this nation. It is not the purpose of government to conform to the desires of a single particular group. Religion has no place in the government. Especially in a government that strives for freedom of ALL religions. A person’s beliefs should remain to themselves and not forced upon anyone. The 1st amendment was established so that one could excercise their religion freely without having to worry about not having equal rights to those belonging to another belief system. Separation of church and state is fine. Confining the people to one path of thinking only destroys progress. Think about the Dark Ages. Religion in government held back Europe for centuries…. I know… a little off topic but had to throw it in there.
homosexuality would not even be tolerated
Free beer for all.
WHATS THE EVERYONE’S BEEF WITH ABORTION AND QUEERS. THEY WANNA BONE EACHOTHER FINE, AS LONG AS IT AINT MY ASS BEING PENETRATED. THATS ABOUT AS SYMPOTHETIC AS I CAN BE RIGHT NOW. AS FAR AS ABORTION. . . .DAMN WELL IM NOT TOUCHING THAT SUBJECT, THAT A POWDER KEG AND IM A KID WITH MATCHES.
Although they probably never thought there could be any other way, they should have put marriage man and woman, and no other.
I have them make it a crime to not wash your hands after using the bathroom. It’s just horrible when people do that.
It’s ok, but it’s not followed anyways, and Bush makes up his own rules! Umm…no censorship or Big Brother?
three cheers for sickboy
It IS disgusting that someone put no gays… Being gay isn’t a disease, it’s in your DNA. And it is estimated that one in every ten people is gay. But, as a child, you think that is icky because it is only when you are older (usually) that you REALIZE that you are a homosexual. So the children grow to adults and the majority teach their children that homos are bad. In conclusion…
1) You are discriminating against a minority whose DNA makes them the way they are.
2) Doing so is like giving the government control over who people marry, the same way fathers in medieval times had total control over who their daughters married.
The basic issue here is to decide whether you are ruled by God (personal interest, I would argue, because it is YOUR interpretation of the Bible that guides you) or ruled by the government (the will of the people in America at least, or so was its creators’ intentions..)
An example situation for everything. And requiring every amendment to have one were applicable.
I wish they had made English our Official National Language at that time. I guess they just figured it would never be an issue…..I know I never did while I was growing up.
A more clear definition on church and state, no slavery (if they only had the knowledge to get rid of it), no voting restrictions as long as they could prove they were American citizens, and something about when it’s right to bear arms.
More protections for the environment, women and minorities. Better checks and balances. And a note at the bottom that says, “SERIOUSLY, GUYS. WE MEAN IT.”
homosexuality should be illegal and not promoted in any way. those who practice it shall be persecuted.
Hey, God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for it (spelling?), why should we be any different?
Posted 5/30/2006 at 10:53 AM by minimusicbox
Who are you to say you have the same right to judge as God?
i would have them put that all people are created equal…. so that women would have had exactly the same rights as men from the beginning, and that race would never have been a way to discriminate….
even today we do not have an Equal Rights Ammendment, so we are dependent upon existing laws, particularly state laws, to enforce what should be a basic issue.
Well, first of all, if you look at the constitution, it states that all men are created equal under God. But, which people were not really considered equal? Blacks, Indians, and Women.
I think we would be better off as a Parliament government, as the Democratic system we have currently just doesn’t work. It never has. It never will. It has only driven us apart, instead of united us.
That being said, I really don’t think I could answer that question under the circumstances.
and there would be no discrimination based on sexual orientation either….
all PEOPLE are created equal
Well, it would have been nice to deal with the slavery issue then and there. But I suppose that’s asking a little too much
either gove us the power to recall the president like california did with their governor or make political parties unconstitutional
or write in an amendment requiring a balanced budget.
OK, so what i’d like to point out is that the constitution is defining how our country is run, not actually creating laws. so all of you that say stuff like -
People who are 65 or older should be required to take the driving test once a year to make sure they are still in good health to drive.
Good point, perhaps, but we’re forgetting the purpose of the consititution. same thing w/using the constitution to abolish gay marriage…that’s a law. it doesn’t belong in the constitution and the only reason congress wants to put it there is b/c that’s the only way the Supreme court can’t rule against it.
How about a cap on politicians salaries? inflation adjustable of course
maybe if they made less money, we’d actually get people who really care as opposed to those just looking for power
Posted 5/30/2006 at 10:34 AM by taglessT
Look what you just said. Face it-Congressmen are making great money, but no where near what they make in their lawyer and business jobs. You said it yourself. They’re looking for power-not money.
Umm…does 5 comments in a row make me a politics geek?
that seperation of Church and State really means seperation of Church and State, and that you don’t create laws based on your personal religious values.
I would just tell them to clarify. I’d point out all the areas that need some clearing up, explain the debate in the future… like the second amendment, for just one example out of many. Stop me before I get all worked up :p
Sorry. Obsessively trying to get my brain around a gigantic supreme court case paper concerning about every amendment that can be debated in the slightest. So the constitution… please don’t mention it. I’ll go on for hours -.-
They did a great job. I don’t know of anything to add. But I do disagree with HealerMatthiax‘s comment. No, I’m not gay but I do support gay rights. And I think that all people should have equal rights whether it be based on race, sexual orientation, hair color, religion, etc.
something about this “Christian nation” sticking to that and going to the Bible first and foremost for justice.
I would change it to include that all PEOPLE are created equal, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation.
With some of the comments you’re getting, I’m certainly glad that these people can’t go back in time…
Persecute people for being gay? Refer to the Bible on all counts?
Talk about the land of the free…
don’t ever elect a bush to president
<TABLE class=blogbody cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width=”100%” border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD width=”5%”>
<TD vAlign=top>
no gays
Posted 5/30/2006 at 8:20 AM by HealerMatthiax
**********************************************
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat? I’m trying to understand where you are coming from. (shakes head)
~Namaste~
)0(
CrimsonWings (A Goddess in the making!)…A continuous work in progress!
I have to agree with Inki, about the one who put “no gays.” Honestly….just when I think people can’t possibly surprise and or shock me…..I read the “No Gays” comment.
Who ever posted that one….isn’t following the greatest commandment given by Christ. They’re certainly not “Loving one another.”
I don’t know if I would want another issue to be addressed; I’d rather have them be more clear about issues like the separation of church and state, for example. It would’ve made things a lot easier for us now.
No Teen dating
freedom OF religion not freedom FROM religion
Specifics.
Marriage is a partnership based on love, not sexual orientation.
Discrimination of any kind (race/ethnicity, age, religion, sex, sexual orientation/identity, political affiliation) is wrong.
Political parties are factious by their nature.
Bureaucracy has SPECIFIC jobs to perform, not vague instructions accompanied by vast amounts of money.
Equality for women. Gay rights. Mandatory voting would be cool. Fine them if they don’t vote. Etc.
EVERYONE has inalienable rights.
all men created equal….and back then it meant how much land and slaves you owned….hasnt chnaged much has it?
All men AND WOMEN are equal.
Dumb sexist bastards….excuse my french.
That would be a long time ago… and I don’t think they would have listened to a black guy back then.
But if I were to send an anonymous letter that was relevant to their times, it would specifically involve equal rights for minorities and women. If those were a part of this nation’s foundation from the start, a lot of the problems of inequality this country has taken so long to overcome would be minimal, if not non-existant.
No War. I hate war. I like your site. Here’s some eprops. I subscribed to your site. You seem really cool.
Don’t fuck the lower classes over.
That is really really tough.
Wow, that is tough.
What should have been in the constitution that wasnt?
Ummm, oh man! Why did I drop out sophomore year!
Ummm….
An ammendment, no, a bullet point, a factoid about um…
you know, mandatory enrollment at 18 in the military really does build character. As a homosexual drug addict sacrificing babies to satan while downloading child pornography and running a meth lab in my kitchen, I think young Americans should build character before college by joining the military for two years.
If slavery had been banned in the constitution, we would have had a civil war (an actual civil war) in 1788. A better way to destroy slavery would have been to prevent the advent of the Cotton Gin.
I personally would not meddle with the constitution itself. However, I would excluded the 16th, 17th, and 18th amendments. I would also have clarified the 1st, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 14th amendments (probably by excluding the 14th).
Mmostly, though, I’d like to knock some SCOTUS judges heads together. The Supreme Court killed the 1870s Civil Rights movements (laed by Grant), as well as the current activist policies and usch idiot ideas as substantive due process.
Reading over the comments….
Banning homosexuality is stupid. It’s their right, let them have AIDS (and to the fool who posted Kinsey’s 1 in 10 claim, please, learn to research)
Women’s suffrage would have been a nice touch, but it belongs in the Bill of Rights (ie amendments)
Banning abortion should have been in the constitution.
Balanced budget was a good idea
Anyone choosing to take up residence in our fine country should be subject to the same laws and taxation as US citizens. Don’t slip in and expect us to educate your children, provide free health care for your family, and pay your share of the taxes.
Don’t get me started.
“Don’t be stupid.”
I would make the gun thing a lot clearer, where the gun nut only reads, “shall not be infringed” I seem to also read “well regulated” But nonetheless, there is a divide.
Really though, knowing they could not see the future, they left a pretty good document, its served over 200years at this point. I’m glad it is something that is amendable too.
Abortion wouldn’t be allowed, because, if you think about it, it really is murder, in one of the most horrible ways possible, to the absolute most innocent of it all. Abortion doctors would be imprisoned.
Constitution isn’t an issue if you have syrup of figs.
F-I-N-A-L-L-Y! Someone who didn’t feel the need to scream FIRST!
I don’t think that there is another issue that the founding fathers needed to write into the constitution. If there were another one needed, surely they would have thought of it–they poured themselves into our constitution and made it as flexible as they could for future generations.
(Now to stray from the question to the issues brought up in the comments.) Where our generation is having trouble with the constitution is that we no longer hold the same system of beliefs which a large majority of our founding fathers did; those beliefs make up the foundation of our constitution. Because that belief system is breaking down, so is our constitution. The reasoning behind our constitution is no longer understood by those who are directing our country (“those” mainly being the justices who interpret the constitution as the wish to see it). Thomas Jefferson thought that every generation ought to write their own constitution; looking at our history and our rising generation of leaders, I’m glad that his idea was not passed.
No discrimination based on sexual orientation in any public format (e.g. workplace). And I’d probably also include an inclusive definition of marriage as something like the following: ”lifelong romantic commitment between any two people of legal age who aren’t related and who are are cognitively aware, regardless of gender, health status, or financial status”
– Pat
I’d have to shoot them(I’m Navaho:))
good lord. some of the stuff they have in there is pretty good but its all been twisted and interpreted differently by everyone so i think they should’ve been more clear about a lot of stuff.
also they should have said that everyone was equal- no matter what gender, race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation- and that everyone had the same rights
I would make it illeagal and have it be one of the things you go to prison for, for life to make more paperbacks then gold.
Oh and legalize gay mairrage.
No slavery. Of course, they wouldn’t be able to get a majority in reality, but if we’re wishing.
Popular vote for Senate and Presidency.
Specifics in interpretation, like what Projektevil said.
Race & Gender issues. Discriminaion against race, gender, physical mobility, gender preference, etc should have more severe consequences. Also religion. When the founding father’s wrote the Constitution they we’re only thinking of Christains, it’d be nice if they including other religions. Weird me saying that even though I am a Christian.
I don’t Know interesting “?”.
Rights that apply to adults should also apply to minors.
I would have them write to hell with political bullshit, excuse my french.
I’m not sure about that one. I suppose I’ll ask if they can write something that gives people under 18 some sort of valid, reconized opinion. Many minors (such as myself) hope that we are able to be heard not only at home or by teachers and friends but also by those of a higher status. Sometimes, minors would act a certain way so they can be heard. Adults always have to represent a child and everything, at least give us a pure chance to speak out. A dream’s a dream I suppose.
hi i don’t know you, but i feel like commenting anyway…..
i would have to say there neeeds to be something about judicial activism so that we wouldn’t have to worry about framers intent and we could use it for more updated times, and for issues not in there to be considered under the constitution becuase of judicial activism….
i hope that makes sense.
my name is moonda.
no descrimination against sexual origin …but it doesn’t matter now becuz no one follows that stuff in that paper anyway
<3Shel
That the president is decided through popular vote rather than through the electoral college.
make everything a bit less ambiguous. interpretation is good, but only to a certain extent.
+ rhetoriqal +
> Nada. The problem that we have is the dishonesty and deceit of the people. ‘So dark the con of man’ it says in the DaVinci code. How true. And how selfish of us all that we want it our way so badly that we might even sell our souls to achieve our selfish desires by warping the meaning of the Constitution. I’ve read it several times. Everything needed is right there. Very smart, those Founding fathers. The Supreme court determines the constitutionality of all laws and legislation or decisions by judges in relation to those. And even they can be bought off by their own selfish desires. Pray that they keep it honest.
Peace
have the judges on the supreme court elected…so that way they can’t abuse their power.
and you can’t go in debt
and no paper money…at least not if its not backed by gold…
No more 5th amendment!