NationStates Jolt Archive

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/15/constitutional-convention-gay-marriage/

Meeting after the big failure at the offices of the social-conservative Family Research Council, the top leaders of the marriage movement — Catholic, Protestant and Mormon leaders among others — discussed the possibility of an unprecedented Constitutional Convention. Two-thirds (34) of the state legislatures would have to call for such a convention — which could be done only with great difficulty. Even then, no one knows what such a convention would look like or what sort of amendments could result from it.

Are they fucking serious?

More Gay Marriage Threads!!! More, I Say!!!

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/15/constitutional-convention-gay-marriage/



Are they fucking serious?
Seemingly, yes.

Sweet! Another thread on gay marriage! We don't have enough of them!

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/15/constitutional-convention-gay-marriage/

Are they fucking serious?
While they might be serious, it's not a very good idea.

During a Constitutional Convention, anything can come up. It puts the Constitution in a very volatile state during the Convention.

While they might be serious, it's not a very good idea.

During a Constitutional Convention, anything can come up. It puts the Constitution in a very volatile state during the Convention.

Im aware. I ask are they serious more in regards to a constitutional convention than being hateful morons.

Sweet! Another thread on gay marriage! We don't have enough of them!

Apparently noone here realizes this isnt asking your opinion on gay marriage its aking your opinion on a god damn constitutional convention.

Im aware. I ask are they serious more in regards to a constitutional convention than being hateful morons.
It's called "I want it my way, and I don't care how much I have to pay."

Once again, not very smart.

While they might be serious, it's not a very good idea.

During a Constitutional Convention, anything can come up. It puts the Constitution in a very volatile state during the Convention.
anything besides gay marriage that could get changed if the convention was already in motion?

Sweet! Another thread on gay marriage! We don't have enough of them!
Let's just rename the forum 'Gay Marraige General'.

They just won't quit? How about quitting threads on gay marriage. Now there's an idea.

anything besides gay marriage that could get changed if the convention was already in motion?

A convention basically rips the constitution to shreds. If this happens say hello to theocracy.

Let's just rename the forum 'Gay Marraige General'.

No shit, huh?

As much as I hate these morons, I must admit that it would be interesting to have a Constitutional Convention again.

A convention basically rips the constitution to shreds. If this happens say hello to theocracy.
ok... so abortion will be up to bat... is there anything nonreligious that 2/3 of the states can agree on?

Are you guys tired of threads on gay marriage by any chance? :D lol

ok... so abortion will be up to bat... is there anything nonreligious that 2/3 of the states can agree on?

I'm betting a clarification of the 2nd amendment would be called for.

ok... so abortion will be up to bat... is there anything nonreligious that 2/3 of the states can agree on?

Well if a religious group calls for one I highly doubt things that are non-religious will be an issue.

ok... so abortion will be up to bat... is there anything nonreligious that 2/3 of the states can agree on?
Money = good.

There.

ok... so abortion will be up to bat... is there anything nonreligious that 2/3 of the states can agree on?

I wouldn't be suprised if the states attemped a power grab if this convention comes to pass.

anything besides gay marriage that could get changed if the convention was already in motion?
During a Constitutional Convention, you can rewrite the whole thing. Which is a dangerous idea.

While I, for one, would appreciate a clarification of the 2nd Amendment as an individual right, I wouldn't risk the rest of the Constitution being on the table in order to get that clarification.

This would be VERY bad ...like "crossing the streams bad!"

As much as I hate these morons, I must admit that it would be interesting to have a Constitutional Convention again.

During a Constitutional Convention, you can rewrite the whole thing. Which is a dangerous idea.

While I, for one, would appreciate a clarification of the 2nd Amendment as an individual right, I wouldn't risk the rest of the Constitution being on the table in order to get that clarification.

You can, but It'll be tough to get a supermajority of delegates to agree.

This is, of course, assuming they follow the format of the first Convention.

This would be VERY bad ...like "crossing the streams bad!"

Well, I have a few changes that I would like to make to the Constitution.

what subjects can be modified by amendment? only the powers of the three branches? would immigration be possible? could you limit the number of children families have?

naive questions i suppose, but genuinely curious.

what subjects can be modified by amendment? only the powers of the three branches? would immigration be possible? could you limit the number of children families have?

naive questions i suppose, but genuinely curious.

Everything is changeable by amendment. Even the Amendment process itself.

Oh I get it.
Penis.

Oh I get it.
Penis.
true

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/15/constitutional-convention-gay-marriage/



Are they fucking serious?

Oh, for the love of all that's good and decent.

A convention such as this is exactly what led to the Constitution being drafted in the first place. States sent delegates with the pretense of revising and strengthening the Articles of Confederation. The delegates then kept their proceedings secret and decided to scrap the Articles and start from scratch.

A Convention really could re-write the whole damn thing, and it the changes are ratified, they are the law of the entire land with nothing anyone can do about it other than vote with their feet and leave. No previous articles or amendments of the Constitution protect you from what can be done here.

This method was placed here by the founders as a last resort, short of armed rebellion, of the states and the people against federal tyranny as a means to legally strip federal power. We shouldn't tinker with this method for social issues - wether to prohibit or enable gay marriage in this particular case.

Even if you are against gay marriage, this route should scare you.

A convention such as this is exactly what led to the Constitution being drafted in the first place. States sent delegates with the pretense of revising and strengthening the Articles of Confederation. The delegates then kept their proceedings secret and decided to scrap the Articles and start from scratch.

A Convention really could re-write the whole damn thing, and it the changes are ratified, they are the law of the entire land with nothing anyone can do about it other than vote with their feet and leave. No previous articles or amendments of the Constitution protect you from what can be done here.

This method was placed here by the founders as a last resort, short of armed rebellion, of the states and the people against federal tyranny as a means to legally strip federal power. We shouldn't tinker with this method for social issues - wether to prohibit or enable gay marriage in this particular case.

Even if you are against gay marriage, this route should scare you.

:eek: I'm moving to Ecuador...

uhh so let them will only give you more civil rights.

I say just as the issue i just got:
let them marry their cats if they want.

this is what stands in my nation:
there have been reports of people marrying housepets.

uhh so let them will only give you more civil rights.

I say just as the issue i just got:
let them marry their cats if they want.

this is what stands in my nation:
there have been reports of people marrying housepets.

You don't seem to realize that the current atmosphere is very conservative and religious. The odds are that there will be MORE restrictions on numerous rights. Like DK said, I'ld like to see a clarification on the 2nd but I won't risk the rest for it.

I wonder if Alabama or Mississippi would try to make provisions to reinstate slavery? :p

Are they fucking serious?
yes they are

The peoples rights to bear rings shall be infringed.

Holy Crap!! It just hit me how bad an idea this is. What...I...HOLY CRAP!

I hope they realize that it COULD backfire, and they could have gay marriage legal in the entire country.
I really hope they realize that they are not the majority and would probably not benefit from this, as the people that hate the religious right ARE the majority.
And of course, there is the possibility that we scrap the whole thing and write it again.

A convention basically rips the constitution to shreds. If this happens say hello to theocracy.

Oh, don't be so optimistic.

*Sits happily in Europe and laughs*

*Sits happily in Europe and laughs*

Don't think Europe is above this homosexual issue. Latvia defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Other Eastern European states are also more on the conservative spectrum.

Don't think Europe is above this homosexual issue. Latvia defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Other Eastern European states are also more on the conservative spectrum.

*Sits happily in Scandinavia and laughs*

Don't think Europe is above this homosexual issue. Latvia defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Other Eastern European states are also more on the conservative spectrum.

*Sits in Canada and eats some bacon*

Don't think Europe is above this homosexual issue. Latvia defined marriage as between a man and a woman. Other Eastern European states are also more on the conservative spectrum.

I'm sorry, let me change it.

*Sits happily in the Civilised World and laughs*

Sorry, didn't mean to kill the thread there...

For most atheist's information, not all Christians think that gay marriage should be banned, because oppressing a group of people is much worse than simply allowing people to make their own decisions that affect no one but themselves. (which is of course not bad at all.) We as a religion should remember what happened to Christians under pre-Constintine Rome before we are quick to demolish gay rights. It's a shame that some Christians (through all time) forget that Jesus's is a message of peaceful conversion, not an oppressive Theocracy that forces itself on people.

We also ought to get the hint that this is not going to work, as this ban has failed what?, twice already?

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/15/constitutional-convention-gay-marriage/

Are they fucking serious?
What a silly suggestion. Most Americans are happy with the existing constitution, are they not?

We also ought to get the hint that this is not going to work, as this ban has failed what?, twice already?

Ah, the Good Lord at work...

A convention basically rips the constitution to shreds. If this happens say hello to theocracy.

A quasi-theocracy? Maybe.

A full blown theocracy? Never.

What a silly suggestion. Most Americans are happy with the existing constitution, are they not?

Well many are rather mad at the establishment clause since it prevents them from forcing their religious views on everybody else.....

Well many are rather mad at the establishment clause since it prevents them from forcing their religious views on everybody else.....

Don't worry, that'll all change when you loose the war on terror. :P