NationStates Jolt Archive

If you could remove one of the 27 Amendments to the US Constitution, which would it be?

Please don't joke around too much. And don't say you'd repeal the 18th Amendment, for it has already been repealed.

Well, once I become ruler of the universe, I plan on repealing amendments one through twenty-seven.

Personally, I'd repeal the 12th Amendment. I think that, in Presidential elections, voters should vote once for any candidate that they believe is fit for the job and that the Vice President should be the second place winner. That's just my humble opinion.

If you could remove one of the 27 Amendments to the US Constitution, which would it be?

Please don't joke around too much. And don't say you'd repeal the 18th Amendment, for it has already been repealed.

I would repeal the US Constitution as a whole.

The 2nd Amendment.

Thanks to the internet, the First Ammendment.

The third. It's useless.

Maybe I should have added...
Please give reasons.

I think the 2nd Amendment, with adequate restrictions, is important. If the government turns into tyranny where the people no longer have a voice in legislation, then they should have the means to abolish the government in the Jeffersonian tradition.

The 3rd Amendment may seem distant and "useless" today, but that is no reason to repeal it. In fact, I see some quasi-violations of it today. US troops are quartered in the homes of former Iraqi leaders. Is that okay? What if Canada invaded us and set up quarters at the Bush ranch?

Maybe I should have added...
Please give reasons.

I think the 2nd Amendment, with adequate restrictions, is important. If the government turns into tyranny where the people no longer have a voice in legislation, then they should have the means to abolish the government in the Jeffersonian tradition.

The 3rd Amendment may seem distant and "useless" today, but that is no reason to repeal it. In fact, I see some quasi-violations of it today. US troops are quartered in the homes of former Iraqi leaders. Is that okay? What if Canada invaded us and set up quarters at the Bush ranch?


Well the third only stops the US gov. from quartering here. So I think it pretty much has never been broken.

In the event the candadians, or more likely the mexicans, do invade I don't think they'll pay much attention to it.

First thing to go is the Second. Repealing that would make gun ownership a state issue, which is not a half-bad idea.

If I have the option to hack off some other amendments, I pick:

Amendment I - if only to revise it to bar ALL governing bodies from abridging free speech/press/assembly/etc., not just Congress. I am just waiting for some power-hungry lunatic to exploit this loophole.

Amendment VII - just because it includes the line about $20.

Amendment XXII - if people want to vote for someone seven times as President, let them. Even if it's Dubya.

Amendment I - if only to revise it to bar ALL governing bodies from abridging free speech/press/assembly/etc., not just Congress. I am just waiting for some power-hungry lunatic to exploit this loophole.

I like some of your ideas. States are now bound to the 1st Amendment because of the clause in the 14th Amendment, which declares, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States..."

I like some of your ideas. States are now bound to the 1st Amendment because of the clause in the 14th Amendment, which declares, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States..."

That could still be circumvented. What I envision is a power-hungry President using an executive order to do so. Not sure if he could really get away with it just based on what he could do with executive orders, but technically, the First Amendment doesn't say he can't...

The 16th Amendment. And the next thing I would do is take a wrecking ball to the IRS's headquarters.

I would choose the 2nd Amendment. It's the least useful. Though I'd be pretty pissed if I couldn't buy a sword--I'm going to start saving up the at-least $10,000 I'll need for a shinken in iaidō soon. Yeah, so maybe I would just choose the 18th...not that it would really count...

Personally, I'd repeal the 12th Amendment. I think that, in Presidential elections, voters should vote once for any candidate that they believe is fit for the job and that the Vice President should be the second place winner. That's just my humble opinion.
Well then the President and Vice-President would be a odds with each other, and there wouldn't be many good things to come of that.

Well then the President and Vice-President would be a odds with each other, and there wouldn't be many good things to come of that.

I think it would be good. It would force better compromise and much more careful lawmaking.

The 5th. It's annoying when people on trial plead the 5th, because you know they're guilty, but they can't prove it.

Definitely the 14th. Then, since I would be in charge, I would start passing all sorts of laws against every majority that has ever lobbied to remove/bar rights from a minority. Once they learned that rights are something to fight for, no matter who you are, I would reinstate it.

I will save my repeal for future anti-gay marriage ammendment. ;)

I will save my repeal for future anti-gay marriage ammendment. ;)

Amen. But if I had to take one of the currently existing ones, I'd repeal the 12th. It's just dumb. Until then, I'll just vote for Prez and VP of different parties.

Without a doubt the 12th amendment.

The VP should certainly be the second place finisher in the election.

I think we should add an amendment to ban political parties. It's what George Washington would've wanted.

Well the third only stops the US gov. from quartering here. So I think it pretty much has never been broken.

In the event the candadians, or more likely the mexicans, do invade I don't think they'll pay much attention to it.

If it's repealed, it won't be able to be broken.

Bush could allow the 47th armored battilion (random name) to live in your house, and you'd have to provide for them.

I will save my repeal for future anti-gay marriage ammendment. ;)

Perhaps a wise choice. You might want to ask lawmakers to combine the Flag Protection Amendment and the Marriage Protection Amendments into one. That way, you could kill two civil rights violations with one repeal. ;)

See my post on the Flag Protection Amendment, http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=380133.

I would repeal the 2nd. I've always hated ranged weapons anyway; I'd much rather have my bladed staff. I call it that because I'm not sure if it has a proper type name. Basically, it's a staff about five feet long with serrated spear points on both ends, for slashing and stabbing.
But I also agree with Mister Teply here; I would definitely repeal that amendment.

I also would get rid of Amendment XXIII - Washington, D.C. never gets any respect, so a new amendment making them a damn state would replace it. Of course, D.C. goes Democratic by about a 10-1 margin every time, and I don't think the Republicans will allow a few more Democrats into Congress.

Judging by what I have heard, D.C. would get 5 electoral votes, three members in the House and two in the Senate, and would vote Republican about as often as the 700 Club would give a prize to the makers of South Park. The Senate would have 102 members, not just 100, and the Electoral College would be reduced to 537 members.

Could someone post a list of the amendments so we know which ones we'd like to repeal?

Could someone post a list of the amendments so we know which ones we'd like to repeal?

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Amend.html

The first ten of them are called the Bill of Rights and are perhaps the most important. The Fourteenth Amendment is also usually considered very important. If you're a US citizen, you should know these eleven very well. If you aren't, you should still know them so that you can laugh at the USA's hypocrisy.

Lemme see if I can remember them without looking them up...

1. Freedom of religion/speech/press/assembly/petition

2. Right to keep an arm bears...err, bear arms

3. No drawing and quartering of soldiers in people's homes, or something like that

4. Right to be tried by a jury

5. The right to plead the 5th Amendment

6. Ummm...oh, fudge bars, I don't remember...something about rights of the accused or something...

7. Civil trials for disputes over more than $20, so if you're fighting for less than $20, I guess you just have to beat the hell out of the person for it

8. No cruel and unusual punishment, so by this, all Super Bowl halftime shows are unconstitutional

9. People's rights

10. States' rights, which probably should have come before people's rights to make any sense

11. Ummm...shit, don't know this one either. Must not be very important.

12. President and VP are on the same ticket now. No more rival President and VP now.

13. No more slavery.

14. Equal rights for everyone regardless of race, unless you're black or otherwise non-white, or even probably if you are white...

15. Ummm...gee whiz, due process? Just guessing.

16. Authorizes the federal government to garnish our wages at whatever rate they feel like.

17. Don't know, so it's not important.

18. No more booze, unless you sneak it into a speakeasy of some sort.

19. Women could vote now, not that they weren't voting in some places already.

20. The President gets booted out of office on the 20th of January rather than some time in March. Of course, it did nothing against the dude they wanted to spite.

21. Invalidates the 18th Amendment. Does some other stuff no one knows about.

22. Only two terms to a President. Bleh.

23. D.C. gets electoral votes now. But still no Congressional reps. Sucks to be them. But slightly less.

24. Aww, poop. Forgot this one.

25. Again, no clue. Have to Google it. Not important, I bet.

26. People can vote at 18 now, or something, not that nost of them choose to.

27. Congress can't vote themselves pay raises anymore without getting re-elected, although most of them still do.

Removal: Well, aside from saving it for the Gay Marriage Ban and the Flag Burning Ban, it'd probably be #22. Like anyone thought that Roosevelt shouldn't have gotten terms 3 and 4? Of course, then Dubya could remain in office indefinitely.. *shudder*
#12 is another worthy target; by having the top two officials in the executive branch have opposing viewpoints, you partially avoid the horde of yesmen currently filling the Bush administration.
In addition, get rid of #18 and #21; it'd be a good symbolic attack on government redundancy.

Modification: 2nd Amendment: It's pretty ambiguous. It could be interpreted as the right to bear arms for the individual citizen, or to keep some guns in storage to toss out to a militia when necessary (not that we even have militias anymore). Personally, I prefer the latter, with the former issue being relegated to the states.
Also, #26 should be alterred to decrease the voting age to 14. When you're 14, you can get a job (in California, at least), and when you get a job, you get taxes taken out of your paycheck. If 14-year-olds can't vote, then we have (bum, bum, BUM) taxation without representation. Besides, you know how annoying it was for me to watch Bush gobble up state after state and not have a say?! :headbang: <-- My feelings exactly.

Added: An amendment allowing those not born in the U.S. to run for President. I would advocate Arnold, but he's a Republican.
An amendment eliminating the electoral college. It's an old holdover from the days when the nation was much less centralized than it is now.
An amendment that allows all American citizens over 18 to run for president. This goes hand-in-hand with my first nomination; if you're considered a citizen, then why shouldn't you help represent other citizens?
An amendmant removing or severly restricting the party system. Current state of affairs: Don't like the Democrats or Republicans? Tough.

I think the 2nd Amendment, with adequate restrictions, is important. If the government turns into tyranny where the people no longer have a voice in legislation, then they should have the means to abolish the government in the Jeffersonian tradition.

If the government becomes tyrannical and you no longer have a voice in legislation, then what makes you think the any part of the Constitution would protect you, let alone the 2nd amendment?

At the very least it needs clarification. The current interpretation, that we somehow or other have the right to own any gun we want, is not even close to being accurate.

For one thing, the amendment refers to "arms," not guns. And technically, nuclear weapons fall under that category. And no one in their right minds thinks private citizens should be allowed to own nuclear bombs.

Second, the amendment guarantees us the right to "keep and bear," not OWN. Technically, the govt could issue you a firearm for protection that you could keep and bear, but you wouldn't own it, and the govt would still be within Constitutional limits.

So what does it mean? I think that the 2nd amendment was meant to establish a militia in the absense of a standing army. But the US not only has a standing army now, but four different branches of military. We're covered. The 2nd amendment is no longer necessary. Repealing it does not mean that we automatically take everyone's guns away. Remember that the 2nd amendment doesn't protect your right to own a gun anyway.

And no one in their right minds thinks private citizens should be allowed to own nuclear bombs.
I do. :D

In addition, get rid of #18 and #21; it'd be a good symbolic attack on government redundancy.

Then how could we ever prove that they existed? :eek: :p

#26 should be alterred to decrease the voting age to 14. When you're 14, you can get a job (in California, at least), and when you get a job, you get taxes taken out of your paycheck. If 14-year-olds can't vote, then we have (bum, bum, BUM) taxation without representation.

At least someone agrees with me. People can make decisions for themselves when they are teenagers. It's not that important to me, though. Most younger thinkers can still persuade voters.

An amendment allowing those not born in the U.S. to run for President. I would advocate Arnold, but he's a Republican.

Arnold has said that he does not want that job anyway.

If a Democrat President wins, and a Repulibcan becomes Vp, what happens if the Dem is assinated? Does the presidancy go to the VP?

16

Arnold has said that he does not want that job anyway.

HE LIES!!!!!!!!!!
THE MAN WANT'S TO RUN FROM GUBER-NATOR TO .... PREZIDE-NATOR? :gundge: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :gundge: :sniper:
THEN OF COURSE IT MIGHT BE the END OF DAYS FOR AMERICA.

Of course I can't vote for him b/c he's republican, but he definently wants to pump up his campaign, erase his competition, tell some true lies to the electorate, then jingle all the way to washington. Hopefully he won't get stuck in a total recall.

HE LIES!!!!!!!!!!
THE MAN WANT'S TO RUN FROM GUBER-NATOR TO .... PREZIDE-NATOR? :gundge: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :gundge: :sniper:
THEN OF COURSE IT MIGHT BE the END OF DAYS FOR AMERICA.

Of course I can't vote for him b/c he's republican, but he definently wants to pump up his campaign, erase his competition, tell some true lies to the electorate, then jingle all the way to washington. Hopefully he won't get stuck in a total recall.


You sir, are one clever, and magnificiant son of a bitch.

The third. Just think of quartering soldiers as an opportunity to make new friends.

Hmmm... if the eighth amendment outlaws cruel and unusual punishment, what about punishments that are cruel but pretty common, or unusual but not that cruel?

And I think Terra Romani might have been playing The Political Machine.

The third. Just think of quartering soldiers as an opportunity to make new friends.

Hmmm... if the eighth amendment outlaws cruel and unusual punishment, what about punishments that are cruel but pretty common, or unusual but not that cruel?

And I think Terra Romani might have been playing The Political Machine.

DING DING DING! Kinda. I have played that game, but didn't copy it directly. It was more like inspiration.

And I have real trouble beating Ahnold. In fact i CANT beat him. I beat Condoleeza Rice, but Ahnold crushes me every time. I made my own candidate, but I've tried dif strategies like 10 times and I still never beat that guy! :headbang:

The XIII Amendment.

We land owners will need cheap labor to work our fields in the post apocalyptic age after the oil wars have reduced our society to ashes and have returned us to a fuedal system of government.

pre-emptivly repeal the 28th amendment should it ever pass. I'm gunna let the gay people marry each other

In canada, if you are under eighteen, IIRC, we just send you a check for all the Tax deductions off of the paychecks you got throughout the year. You most likely have to deal with some paperwork first.

Just glancing at them, I'd say the 22nd would be my top candidate. The 7th has that dumb $20 limit, but it also has the double jeopardy clause, and that's too important to dump.

The 7th has that dumb $20 limit, but it also has the double jeopardy clause, and that's too important to dump.

No, the Double Jeopardy Clause is in the Fifth Amendment.

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

pre-emptivly repeal the 28th amendment should it ever pass. I'm gunna let the gay people marry each other

You must have missed my post on the Flag Protection Amendment, http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=380133. It is much more likely to pass than the Marriage Protection Amendment.

No, the Double Jeopardy Clause is in the Fifth Amendment.

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."You are correct. I was thinking of this section of the seventh--"and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

Six words; Income Tax, Income Tax, Income Tax!

The XIII Amendment.

We land owners will need cheap labor to work our fields in the post apocalyptic age after the oil wars have reduced our society to ashes and have returned us to a fuedal system of government.

If such a dreaded scenario ever came to pass, and if we reverted back to fedual governments, then the Constitution would no longer apply anyway. :(

Can anyone really argue with repealing the Second Amendment if it means that gun ownership becomes a state issue? Say what you will about rising up against a tyrannical government; the people who believe that largely live in states populated by people who wouldn't dream of letting their state legislatures ban guns. Banning guns in the South would be political suicide; doing so in Vermont might be acceptable. Plus, according to this, someone could argue that they have a Constitutional right to own an H-bomb, as another poster here argued (I forget who...)

Can anyone really argue with repealing the Second Amendment if it means that gun ownership becomes a state issue? Say what you will about rising up against a tyrannical government; the people who believe that largely live in states populated by people who wouldn't dream of letting their state legislatures ban guns. Banning guns in the South would be political suicide; doing so in Vermont might be acceptable. Plus, according to this, someone could argue that they have a Constitutional right to own an H-bomb, as another poster here argued (I forget who...)

Tough. It's staying.

For one thing, the amendment refers to "arms," not guns. And technically, nuclear weapons fall under that category. And no one in their right minds thinks private citizens should be allowed to own nuclear bombs.

No. The term arms in this context means small arms, i.e. anything up to and including the standard infantry weapon.

That said, rather than repealing an amendment, I'd add a new one: term limits for members of Congress. If I absolutely had to repeal an amendment, I'd do Prohibition. Yes, it's already been repealed once, but surely it wouldn't hurt to repeal it again.

Six words; Income Tax, Income Tax, Income Tax!

Ooh, I forgot about this one. I'm changing my vote. The 16th is toast.

1) First Amendment - also revise it to make clear that Atheists and Agnostics' beliefs are just as protected as any religious believer's are.

2) which amendment repealed federal alchohol prohibition? Revise it to make all recreational drug use states' rights issues. For that matter, why the Hell did it take an amendment to federally outlaw booze, one of the most destructive drugs mankind has ever known, but it took no such measure for the feds to outlaw grass? Crazitude!

Plus, according to this, someone could argue that they have a Constitutional right to own an H-bomb, as another poster here argued (I forget who...)
And no one in their right minds thinks private citizens should be allowed to own nuclear bombs.
I do. :D
;)

The 16th Amendment. And the next thing I would do is take a wrecking ball to the IRS's headquarters.


I agree...the whole tax thing is getting annoying.

I forget the Amendment number, But I would repeal the amendment that allowed the people to vote for the US Senators and not the state legislature. It should be done by the state legislature and NOT the people!

If it's repealed, it won't be able to be broken.

Bush could allow the 47th armored battilion (random name) to live in your house, and you'd have to provide for them.

ANd this was one of the causes of the American Revolution! The people didn't stand for that then and they won't now.

I also would get rid of Amendment XXIII - Washington, D.C. never gets any respect, so a new amendment making them a damn state would replace it. Of course, D.C. goes Democratic by about a 10-1 margin every time, and I don't think the Republicans will allow a few more Democrats into Congress.

It doesn't need to be an amendment. All it would require is for Congress to ask D.C. to be a state and D.C. will vote on it. No amendment required.

Judging by what I have heard, D.C. would get 5 electoral votes, three members in the House and two in the Senate, and would vote Republican about as often as the 700 Club would give a prize to the makers of South Park. The Senate would have 102 members, not just 100, and the Electoral College would be reduced to 537 members.

why would they have 3 House members? They would only get 1 based on population +2 senators thus they would still have 3 electoral votes.

Perhaps a wise choice. You might want to ask lawmakers to combine the Flag Protection Amendment and the Marriage Protection Amendments into one. That way, you could kill two civil rights violations with one repeal. ;)

And the flag is the national symbol of this country so I think it should be protected. As does the National Motto!

If a Democrat President wins, and a Repulibcan becomes Vp, what happens if the Dem is assinated? Does the presidancy go to the VP?

Yes it does then to the Speaker of the House, followed by the President Pro Tempe and on down. There is a chain of command somewhere regarding Presidential succession.

Six words; Income Tax, Income Tax, Income Tax!

This one too but then we'll have an unemployment spike as the IRS is eliminated. Allwell

16. A more fair tax, to fund the things ABSOLUTELY NECCESSARY, like having a coast guard and national highways, but not welfare or social security, (leave it up to the states) could be funded by a sales tax on luxury goods or something.

XVI, no question.

(and a handy-dandy list (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendments.html) for the ignorant.)

Dude, the income tax is one of the primary taxes. If you eliminate it, you eliminate a huge chunk of the government's revinue, which will have disastrous effects on the economy. Just look at the vast, huge debt now caused, in part, by Bush's tax cuts. And you can't relegate social programs to the states; they're in an even worse position to pay for them then the federal government.

However, taxes definitely should be made simpler. A plain 'if you make X amount, you pay Y amount, so send us the check' formula would be much simpler than the endless mass of Catch-22's that the current tax system is.

I'd repeal the one that gives term limits to presidents. I don't believe in term limits for politicians, and believe that they have the right to serve as long as they are voted in.

MORONS!!! <---[ flamebait ]

If income tax were repealed today, the government would default on trillions of dollars of loans and the country would fall apart. You can thank G-Dubyah the fucktard for that. Well, and long years of borrow-and-spend conservativism, but I like to thank the fucktard. ;)

MORONS!!! <---[ flamebait ]

If income tax were repealed today, the government would default on trillions of dollars of loans and the country would fall apart. You can thank G-Dubyah the fucktard for that. Well, and long years of borrow-and-spend conservativism, but I like to thank the fucktard. ;)

That's not just you though. I mean, blaming fucktards is just an all around fun thing to do, really.

That's what the country reeks of. Ugly old republican fucktards.

That's what the country reeks of. Ugly old republican fucktards.

In that case then you have to blame the Democratic fucktards too who don't want to see the precious tax code changed. Bush at least wants to reform it and the democratic fucktards don't want too!

In that case then you have to blame the Democratic fucktards too who don't want to see the precious tax code changed. Bush at least wants to reform it and the democratic fucktards don't want too!

So far his idea of "reform" is to decrease taxes while increasing spending. :rolleyes: What a 'tard.

So far his idea of "reform" is to decrease taxes while increasing spending. :rolleyes: What a 'tard.

And so was Kerry because he was offering to spend more than what Bush was spending and I didn't hear you complain of Kerry's proposed spending!

And I thank God for the Tax Cuts.

And so was Kerry because he was offering to spend more than what Bush was spending and I didn't hear you complain of Kerry's proposed spending!

And I thank God for the Tax Cuts.

Y'all complain about all spending and about all taxes. Libertarian? Let's just close all public schools while we're at it. Bush spends (never seen a spending bill he didn't sign) while cutting the income that would pay for his spending, thus giving us a new record in debt. Kerry might have spent more, might have spent less, but would have paid for it. If you're opposed to spending you should be opposed to both of them. If you think that borrowing money that our children's taxes will have to pay for is better than using current taxes for current spending, I guess that's why you support Bush. If he had his way he would close the IRS and just borrow the money to hand out no-bid contracts to his Halliburton pals - after all, he wants to start Armageddon so that Jesus can come back on his watch, so there won't be a next generation to have to pay off those trillions.

after all, he wants to start Armageddon so that Jesus can come back on his watch, so there won't be a next generation to have to pay off those trillions.

wow lmao

Y'all complain about all spending and about all taxes. Libertarian? Let's just close all public schools while we're at it. Bush spends (never seen a spending bill he didn't sign) while cutting the income that would pay for his spending, thus giving us a new record in debt. Kerry might have spent more, might have spent less, but would have paid for it. If you're opposed to spending you should be opposed to both of them. If you think that borrowing money that our children's taxes will have to pay for is better than using current taxes for current spending, I guess that's why you support Bush. If he had his way he would close the IRS and just borrow the money to hand out no-bid contracts to his Halliburton pals - after all, he wants to start Armageddon so that Jesus can come back on his watch, so there won't be a next generation to have to pay off those trillions.

I'm not a libertarian. If you close down all the public schools...then the Dept. of Ed. will cease to exist! (It should anyway) As for Income, the income rose up in december. Kerry would've spent more and to pay for it, he would've had to raise our taxes. No way can raising it on only the top 1% or whatever was going to pay for all of it. As for closing down the IRS, get rid of the the income tax amendment and do so. I will support that. as for the rest of your statement. LMFAO!!!!

wow lmao

I wish it was a joke. :(

I'm not a libertarian. If you close down all the public schools...then the Dept. of Ed. will cease to exist! (It should anyway) As for Income, the income rose up in december. Kerry would've spent more and to pay for it, he would've had to raise our taxes. No way can raising it on only the top 1% or whatever was going to pay for all of it. As for closing down the IRS, get rid of the the income tax amendment and do so. I will support that. as for the rest of your statement. LMFAO!!!!

So... no public education, and no government programs of any kind. No government, just a few trillion in government debt. Use brain much?

So... no public education, and no government programs of any kind. No government, just a few trillion in government debt. Use brain much?

I didn't say close down the public schools, I said get rid of the Dept. of Education! Can you read? And what did I say about government programs? I said not a word! Good job in reading stuff that wasn't there. Use eyes much?

I didn't say close down the public schools, I said get rid of the Dept. of Education! Can you read? And what did I say about government programs? I said not a word! Good job in reading stuff that wasn't there. Use eyes much?

1) you said the Dept. of Education should shut down. That would shut down all public education, unless you replace it with something else - which you would probably hate just as much.

2) you would shut down the IRS. That would leave borrowing as the only source of government income. Ever see a bank loan money to an unemployed person? The government would default on its existing debts and shut down, unless you would replace income tax with some other form of government income - see above.

3) look up "inference".

4) look into Reading Comprehension.

5) use brain more.

The 16th and 17th Amendments.

OK I'm half wrong and you're half wrong: public education would be funded entirely on the local level, where it is paid for by local taxes (I guess you don't mind those). This would greatly increase the already large income gap between rich and poor communities... but I guess you don't mind that.

Get rid of the IRS, otoh, and the U.S.A. would collapse... but maybe you want that, too.

The 16th Amendment. And the next thing I would do is take a wrecking ball to the IRS's headquarters.
And we would pay for a military, how?

Get rid of the IRS, otoh, and the U.S.A. would collapse... but maybe you want that, too.

How so? We got along fine without the IRS for over a century, did we not?

I see no need to repeal any of them. Just further legislate the 2nd amendment.

The 16th and 17th Amendments.

OK, so you, too, want the Fed to default and collapse, but what have you got against the 17th?

OK, so you, too, want the Fed to default and collapse, but what have you got against the 17th?

The 17th destroys the original purpose of the Senate, which was to represent states at the national level. Because Senators are now directly elected, rather than chosen by state legislatures, they no longer serve their original purpose.

How so? We got along fine without the IRS for over a century, did we not?

That was before the Republicunts borrowed us into a multi-trillion dollar hole.

BTW, how was the Fed funded before that?

The 17th destroys the original purpose of the Senate, which was to represent states at the national level. Because Senators are now directly elected, rather than chosen by state legislatures, they no longer serve their original purpose.

Less power to the people. I bet you'd like to keep the Electoral College too, huh?

That was before the Republicunts borrowed us into a multi-trillion dollar hole.

BTW, how was the Fed funded before that?

The Fed and the 16th Amendment were both born at about the same time.

Less power to the people. I bet you'd like to keep the Electoral College too, huh?

I have mixed feelings about the Electoral College.

The Fed and the 16th Amendment were both born at about the same time.

Really. And here I thought that the U.S. of A. had a centralized government, however small, from the beginning. Was the Presidency a volenteer position? Was there no national army before the 16th Amendment? Was the U.S. Navy donated by private patrons? No wonder they came up with that law.

I have mixed feelings about the Electoral College.

Well, you seem to think that democratic involvement should remain, and should have remained, minimal. So what's bad about the EC?

Less power to the people. I bet you'd like to keep the Electoral College too, huh?

Give the State Legislators the power to vote for Senators! Go back to the Original way that was done and keep the electoral college.

Maybe I should have added...
Please give reasons.

I think the 2nd Amendment, with adequate restrictions, is important. If the government turns into tyranny where the people no longer have a voice in legislation, then they should have the means to abolish the government in the Jeffersonian tradition.

The 3rd Amendment may seem distant and "useless" today, but that is no reason to repeal it. In fact, I see some quasi-violations of it today. US troops are quartered in the homes of former Iraqi leaders. Is that okay? What if Canada invaded us and set up quarters at the Bush ranch?


No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be perscribed by law.
I don't know but I think that because he "took", by the money of the people, the house we may have the right.
wait no I think you are right.
But maybe it has to do with other countries.

Give the State Legislators the power to vote for Senators! Go back to the Original way that was done and keep the electoral college.

Why?

[QUOTE=Bill of Rights]
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

AMENDMENT XI
Passed by Congress March 4, 1794. Ratified February 7, 1795.

Note: Article III, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 11.

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XII
Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.

Note: A portion of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution was superseded by the 12th amendment.

The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; -- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. --]* The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

*Superseded by section 3 of the 20th amendment.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XIII
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.

Note: A portion of Article IV, section 2, of the Constitution was superseded by the 13th amendment.

Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

*Changed by section 1 of the 26th amendment.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XV
Passed by Congress February 26, 1869. Ratified February 3, 1870.

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude--

Section 2.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XVI
Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.

Note: Article I, section 9, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 16.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XVII
Passed by Congress May 13, 1912. Ratified April 8, 1913.

Note: Article I, section 3, of the Constitution was modified by the 17th amendment.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XVIII
Passed by Congress December 18, 1917. Ratified January 16, 1919. Repealed by amendment 21.

Section 1.
After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

Section 2.
The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Section 3.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XIX
Passed by Congress June 4, 1919. Ratified August 18, 1920.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XX
Passed by Congress March 2, 1932. Ratified January 23, 1933.

Note: Article I, section 4, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of this amendment. In addition, a portion of the 12th amendment was superseded by section 3.

Section 1.
The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2.
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 3.
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

Section 4.
The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

Section 5.
Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.

Section 6.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XXI
Passed by Congress February 20, 1933. Ratified December 5, 1933.

Section 1.
The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2.
The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

Section 3.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XXII
Passed by Congress March 21, 1947. Ratified February 27, 1951.

Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XXIII
Passed by Congress June 16, 1960. Ratified March 29, 1961.

Section 1.
The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XXIV
Passed by Congress August 27, 1962. Ratified January 23, 1964.

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.

Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XXV
Passed by Congress July 6, 1965. Ratified February 10, 1967.

Note: Article II, section 1, of the Constitution was affected by the 25th amendment.

Section 1.
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

Section 2.
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

Section 3.
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

Section 4.
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XXVI
Passed by Congress March 23, 1971. Ratified July 1, 1971.

Note: Amendment 14, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 1 of the 26th amendment.

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AMENDMENT XXVII
Originally proposed Sept. 25, 1789. Ratified May 7, 1992.

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of representatives shall have intervened.