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
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
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.
JPWhoo · 36-40, M
@TexChik
The people decide, not the government.
If that were really true then no states would have laws banning abortion because it would be left up to “the people” in consultation with their doctors.
TexChik · F
@JPWhoo the voters decide who sits in the state houses ,and they make the laws , the governor see guns their bills . No unelected official can determine state law .

Your issue is that the majority in most states do not approve and you want a quick fix that will force the will of the minority on the majority.
@TexChik I get what you're saying, but the point, in this post, at least, is maybe the people now ought to have more of a say, as opposed to the people on 1787, 1791, etc.

I threw in women's rights, but this post was inspired by the interpretation of the Establishment Clause (and what follows) and the fact that, we seem to be getting unpopular results in applying the original intent of the founders to modern day issues.

Taxation, for example, has changed a lot since 1791, and treating an entity like the FRC like a Church and this immune from taxation, doesnt seem like something that was contemplated, anymore than letting women or black folks vote in federal elections.

I'm cool with leaving abortion, murder, and the like up to the States, of we make that decision, but I kind of feel like we haven't, and haven't really come to grips with the practical expansion of the federal government.
TexChik · F
@MistyCee that’s just it . Conservatives do not want expanded federal government. The fed under Biden is over reaching and corrupt now !

We all know what it takes to amend the constitution. However it would be nice after the destruction biden is causing if a convention of states were to be convened to correct a few things to protect the American people and put further limits on government.
JPWhoo · 36-40, M
@TexChik
you want a quick fix that will force the will of the minority on the majority.
I don’t want to force my will on anyone on this particular issue. I want it to be left between each individual and her doctor, that’s not forcing anyone to do anything. Look, it’s fine for you to believe big government belongs in a lady’s nether region, but I won’t let you pretend that that’s not big government.
TexChik · F
@JPWhoo in every state , even though the majority don’t want federal abortion mandates. You want your cake and eat it too . There is a third life involved there ! 73 million have been snuffed out with out due process. That is disgusting.
@TexChik Thus far at least, Biden has done very little in terms of expanding the federal government or the executive, as compared to Trump, Obama, Bush, etc.

What "his" SCOTUS is doing is a little more complicated, but I kind of think that a little "of the people" attention makes sense right now, because we're stuck in a rut with a dysfunctional Congress, a back and forth but ever expanding executive, and a judicial branch filling in the gaps it was never designed to do.
TexChik · F
@MistyCee perhaps you are only used to the judiciary legislating liberal edicts from the bench and don’t know how to react when conservatives end those activist decisions that perverted constitution from its intended role .
@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.