If you could, how would you change the Constitution?

[Observer]

I was actually hoping people would provide REASONS for the changes they would like to see. Perhaps some of you would be willing to expand on the rationale behind your proposed changes.

[johnhp]

a clearly worded separation of church and state amendment.. there should be no doubt that religion has no place in gov't and vice versa

It is clear enough, people who misunderstand it do so willfully.

[Case_Closed]

It is clear enough, people who misunderstand it do so willfully.

I thought you were a "Social Christian?"

*chortles*

[DougRich]

It is clear enough, people who misunderstand it do so willfully.

People can have an honest disagreement about what they think constitutes an "establishment of religion"...but the only ultimately binding opinion is that of the courts. The same is true for many other words and phrases in the Constitution, as in any legal document.

[vel]

Amending the Constitution will not solve the problems. The solution here is for WE, THE PEOPLE to enforce our will against the traitorous "conservatives".

This will happen, as more and more of the reprobates who tend to be miserable old white men naturally die off. It's happening as we speak. "Conservatism" is a dying ideology. The victory in 2008 simply highlighted the reasons why WE, THE PEOPLE must reject these traitorous reprobates and the incredibly low ratings of Congress show that people have buyer's remorse.

We will be fine as we have fewer and fewer mopes willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

[vel]

People can have an honest disagreement about what they think constitutes an "establishment of religion"...but the only ultimately binding opinion is that of the courts. The same is true for many other words and phrases in the Constitution, as in any legal document.

But that's not what "conservatives" do. Leo Strauss and his acolytes introduced "the noble lie" into their stupid ideology, and lying is a slippery slope. If you start down that slippery slope, as "conservatives" did, you soon cannot distinguish between lies and truth.

[Case_Closed]

The victory in 2008 simply highlighted the reasons why WE, THE PEOPLE must reject these traitorous reprobates and the incredibly low ratings of Congress show that people have buyer's remorse.

That was a rather short honeymoon, wouldn't you say?

They didn't have time for the paint to dry or the drapes to even be opened but a few times until The Great Shellacking of November 2, 2010.

How do you explain that?

[johnhp]

I thought you were a "Social Christian?"

*chortles*

Christian socialist.  Do you have some sort of question that is puzzling you here?

[johnhp]

People can have an honest disagreement about what they think constitutes an "establishment of religion"...but the only ultimately binding opinion is that of the courts. The same is true for many other words and phrases in the Constitution, as in any legal document.

i do not disagree, but i think there is at the very least minimum to which the term "establishment" directs us and that is what i believe many on the new right in Christianity willfully ignore.

[johnhp]

Oh, and bear arms.  i think we should leave the bears intact.

[DougRich]

Oh, and bear arms.  i think we should leave the bears intact.

And, of course, arm them.

[johnhp]

And, of course, arm them.

Mutant bears with muskets...

[Observer]

Leave it to Velleity and his favorite toady to drop in and defecate all over what could have been the most interesting and revealing thread ever on Newsrake.

[Undecided]

I was actually hoping people would provide REASONS for the changes they would like to see. Perhaps some of you would be willing to expand on the rationale behind your proposed changes.

Ok, I would add social safety net provisions, at least similar to SS and Medicare/Medicaid, as well as unemployment insurance, because it is in society's larger interest to not having old people on the streets or people down on their luck starving, which is why those programs were put in place during the Great Depression.

I would have government-provided health care, at least to some degree, because medical science has progressed so far from where it was at the time the country was founded, when the use of leeches for bloodletting was considered to be medical treatment.  I also don't really like the idea of a for-profit company being the gateway to what care will be provided, and I never liked the "managed care" concept.  My brother-in-law is American, but currently lives in Brazil, and has free health care there.  He just had a routine physical, during which they did an MRI!  They found kidney stones he didn't know he had is now undergoing treatment for it.  Free!  And Fast!  Try getting an MRI done here, even when you know there is something wrong with you.

Equal protection under the law for all, and I hope the reasons for that are self-evident.

Restrictions on firearms because they are dangerous devices.  We regulate everything else that is even the least bit dangerous, so why wouldn't we regulate these?  I might even ban hand guns, with perhaps an exception for people who truly do use them for sport, or are in a position of law enforcement or such, but there would be a lot of hoops to jump through to get one.

A balanced budget would be mandatory, so that we don't get into the kind of budgetary mess we are in now.

With the religious diversity we have in the country now, I would make it clear that religion has no place in government, or vice versa.

[vel]

Leave it to Velleity and his favorite toady to drop in and defecate all over what could have been the most interesting and revealing thread ever on Newsrake.

Whine about it some more O B S U R D E R.