Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

How long will it be until the US revises the Constitution?

I get the risks, from a political point of view, but the damned thing doesn't address womens rights at all, and as interpreted currently, seems pretty inconsistent with popular opinion designed for political unrest and eventual collapse.

Even if the founders were geniuses, I can't help thinking that subsequent generations have perverted their words.

If the FRC is a church, why shouldn't the GOP be one?


https://www.propublica.org/article/family-research-council-irs-church-status
BlueVeins · 22-25
The Constitution is full of crippling problems and is basically a steaming pile of dog shit for modern use. The composition of the legislature is probably the most egregious issue; the more populous your state is, the less your vote matters. The Senate was literally just a compromise between the relatively decent states in the north & the slavers in the south, and apparently we kinda just forgot to rectify it after the Civil War. Even the House of Representatives is biased towards small stated, and the combination gives small states a boost in the Presidency, too. Moreover, First Past the Post voting guarantees the formation of two political parties, which is bad for a variety of reasons which I'm sure you already know.

There's no protection from gerrymandering. The mandate of Congress is too narrow, to a point where the US is only even able to govern itself by abusing the shit out of the Commerce Clause. The 5th Amendment establishes a right to private property, which is universally interpreted to include land ownership. That's kinda horseshit because land is naturally occurring and limited in supply. All of the land anyone claims to own was, somewhere far back in the past, either stolen from its previous owners by force found uninhabited. In order to say that land ownership is morally justified, we'd have to either argue in favor of "finders keepers" or "might makes right," both of which are generally not accepted in modern times.

I could go on for a while, but yeah the Constitution is shit. Grind it up for compost and write a new one.
@BlueVeins No need to go on. You raised good points.
tallpowerhouseblonde · 36-40, F
As divorce rates are crazy high and the birth rate has collapsed the last thing needed is a Constitution amendment to make things even worse.The femenist movement has been a disaster for the U.S. along with many other countries.
Religion and Politics should never be combined.The only countries where this happens have a civil war.
If you think you are getting a bad deal in the U.S. then move to Aphganistan so you can understand what a bad situation for women actually looks like.You would be jailed for making a post like this.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
SinlessOnslaught · 26-30, M
@LvChris That's enough for me to know about your character.
@tallpowerhouseblonde Trump made it clear that it wasn't just about illegal immigrants, but immigrants, legal or not, from the part of the world most illegal immigrants come from.
TexChik · F
Therefore, per the constitution, powers not expressly given to the federal government and not expressly denied to the states are under the control of the states . The constitution did address this issue , you just don’t like the answer. Each individual state will decide if it’s female citizens have the unfettered rights to kill their developing babies rather than be forced to accept something they don’t agree with, or maybe they do agree. The people decide , not the government.
@TexChik Umm, most of my life, I've been watching the Warren/Burger/Renquist/Roberts thing going on, for sure, but it really seems like Thomas is taking us back to challenging Marshall and Marbury vs Madison.
TexChik · F
@MistyCee I suspect Thomas finds himself in a position he has dreamed of for 30 years .
@TexChik I agree with you there.
Until Biden is able to get the numbers he needs in the senate, any chance of codifying Roe v. Wade or Casey v. Planned Parenthood will be non-existent.

You want change, then get out to the polls and vote for it. Pure and simple.
GJOFJ3 · 61-69, M
@GohantheThird They had the numbers in Obama’s first term, 2009, but failed to act. They didn’t want to cause a political upheaval by bringing it to a vote, believing the court and congress was always going to be in their favor. Now it will take a national referendum to amend the constitution, which they currently do not have the votes for, or wait until the next time they have a super majority in the senate
@GJOFJ3 this is true. Hopefully those numbers will change (in congress anyway) so that it can change.
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@GJOFJ3

Obama was too interested in a "legacy" issue (ObamaCare) than SCOTUS, Russia, raising the minimum wage, etc.
That was the presumption of Madison and Jefferson. That we would be adaptive, creative, and modern and rewrite the constitution on a regular basis. They would point to the amendments as a good example that the constitution was inherently flawed and needed modification according to the times.

We could do it. It would require a constitutional Congress. I suspect if it came to that, the constitution would go retrograde, not forward.

So I think we're culturally doomed on this time and place to have six "literalists" and "originalists' dousing the constitution of their dowsing rods of some privileged presumption of what the forefathers thought and intended.
JPWhoo · 36-40, M
Yeah, it clearly needs new amendments at least, but it looks like it’s going to be a long time still because 1. We seem to be stuck in an era in which the Constitution is revered as an infallible document like the Bible, and 2. The mechanisms the Constitution lays out for amending it create hurdles that are practically impossible to clear in this era of hyper partisanship.
SW-User
It can be revised through amendments but those require a large majority of states to be approved, so there's a reason there hasn't been an amendment passed since 1992. Originalism is the primary Constitutional interpretation espoused by the current Court, so any chance of changes to the Constitution is very low right now.
GJOFJ3 · 61-69, M
The founders specified a process by which the Constitution may be amended, and since its ratification, the Constitution has been amended 27 times. It can be amended by proper process, but not by Michael Moore rewriting it
@GJOFJ3 I get that, but sometimes folks like Moore, Trump, or even Bannon, raise good points.
Crazywaterspring · 61-69, M
The US could be doomed within the next few decades. A rewrite of the Constitution would be left up to crazies (Federalist Society) and lobbyists.

The Christotaleban and Wall Street would be in charge.
Longpatrol · 31-35, M
The US Constitution is one of the few that doesn't address the future needs of a country. It's very limited to the reality of the 18th century
Tear the whole thing up and start again.
Fukfacewillie · 56-60, M
The founders were flawed and so is the Constitution. It will never be reformed though. Two Americas now and the minority is Mostly in control and slouching towards fascism, allbeit an American variant.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment

 
Post Comment