NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, here's the scenario: for some reason or other, you've been asked to produce a second bill of rights for the US. Due to public demand, you can add up to ten nonridiculous things as new amendments to the US constitution. What would you put in?

The leader of the United States shall be chosen by the rest of the world. We'd probably be better at it than you are.

Nonridiculous things only? :(

The leader of the United States shall be chosen by the rest of the world. We'd probably be better at it than you are.

Pfft.

Nonridiculous things only? :(

It does rather limit things.

Pfft.

Come on...who would want Hilary Clinton when you could have Gordon Brown?

Come on...who would want Hilary Clinton when you could have Gordon Brown?

Guh? :p

Guh? :p

He'd be a boring, incompetent, dithering idiot of a leader, just like he is here. But at least he'd be prudent about it all. :p

He'd be a boring, incompetent, dithering idiot of a leader, just like he is here. But at least he'd be prudent about it all. :p

Probably. Although if the entire *world* had a vote, we'd probably have a Chinaman running the show - that'd make for some antics. :p

Amendment XXVIII: All Articles and Rights enumerated in the Constitution are held to be interpreted in the widest possible method.

Amendment XXIX: No citizen has the right to not be offended by the actions of others, nor may any entity seek to block a citizen from acting in a legal fashion of enjoyment of said rights and liberties.

Amendment XXX: Free porn for all. (Sorry couldn't resist...) :D

I've always wanted to do something like this with a wiki-type setup and a vote entry for determining the "leading" standard of rights/scheme of constitution. I think it would be an interesting study, to say the least.

Freedom of Speech only applies to non-right wing thought.


Oh, non-rediculous?

The Government has no right to interfere with the consentual relations of any residents, be them marrital or otherwise.

The leader of the United States shall be chosen by the rest of the world. We'd probably be better at it than you are.

we haven't shoveled people into ovens on an industrial scale...

we haven't forcibly relocated farmers to starve them and sent city people to the farms by force to try and farm....

we don't have the Chavez/Mugabe "you'll make the economy work the way we say" policies...

we haven't done the Pol Pot thing yet...

In terms of the sheer number of people killed pointlessly by the government's actions, we don't come close to the "rest of the world"

The leader of the United States shall be chosen by the rest of the world. We'd probably be better at it than you are.

Agreed, the Chinese would give us a much better government:rolleyes:

The Ten Amendments: Abridged for the Spastic

Amendment I: People can say what they want, do what they want, so long as they don't hurt anyone. You don't like that, well you can SHUT UP!

Amendment Two (LOL): People who've shown that they are responsible and have reason to own a gun, may own a gun. You don't like it, SHUT UP!

Amendment Drei: No jackoff and his whole platoon has the right to squat in your house. They tell you ya have to? Tell 'em to SHUT UP!

Amendment Gamma: No jackoff and his whole police force has the right to riffle through your shit. They tell you it's in the name of "national security"? You tell 'em to SHUT UP!

Amendment F1V3-October: Even the accused have rights. You get arrested, you get a fair trial by jury, can't be charged twice for the same crime, and cannot be forced to implicate yourself. You'll also have the chance to bail yourself out fairly. Some feds try to push your shit in, tell 'em to SHUT UP!

Amendment π/∞: The feds don't tell you it ain't legal, then it's legal. Tell 'em to STAY SHUT UP!

Amendment <(^_^<): The feds don't tell the state it ain't legal, then it's legal. Have a nice day.

Amendment XXVIII. The First Amendment is hereby repealed. Free speech is still OK, as is freedom of religion, assembly, petition, etc. as long as you don't hurt anyone else because of it. And free press is OK as well, but the media isn't allowed to lie just to make money, trump up a war or government agenda, or harm someone's reputation.

Amendment XXIX. The Second Amendment is hereby repealed, and all weapons laws are hereby up to the states. And no trafficking weapons in and out of these United States unless you're doing it for military purposes. Seriously. We don't need the headache.

Amendment XXX. All Americans get health care. We pay taxes for a reason, and it's time to cut into some of the overhead. Sure, maybe fancy-schmancy stuff can be handled by private insurance, but as far as life-saving medicine and the basics, especially if the stuff is past its patent anyway? It's all free.

Amendment XXXI. All Americans get education. Good education. I don't care where you live. If you're a poor kid in the ghetto, a hard-luck farmer in the country, a well-off suburbanite's child, or a rich future gazillionaire, you all get the same education, one that puts Europe, Japan, and all those little islands no one's ever heard of to shame.

Amendment XXXII. The Electoral College goes bye-bye. The President is selected according to a runoff system that is designed by the same people who wrote "American Idol." Open auditions will be held during September to the last Wednesday before Thanksgiving the year before the election. Anyone who's 18 or older and a citizen can run. We'll make it into a reality show. Why not? It worked for everything else. The President serves a four-year term, makes $1 million (in 2008 dollars; that amount goes up or down with the rate of inflation every ear,) and cannot accept any other payments from anyone.

Amendment XXXIII. Congress is now unicameral and selected by a PR system. You vote for the party. Like the President, Congress members serve four-year terms and are elected two years after the President; that way all the election rejects can get on the ballot. The number of representatives shall be one per, say, 100,000 people. Yes, that means 3,000 or so people will be in Congress. What, you've never seen that many people in a room before? Come on. Oh, by the way, Congress members make $250,000 per year in 2008 dollars, and that goes up or down with inflation every year, and they can't accept payouts from lobbyists or anyone. Can't live on a quarter-million? A life as a high-priced call girl liek the ones Eliot Spitzer hired is a better choice for you.

Amendment XXXIV. The Department of Transportation shall employ a group of "regular Joes" with some traffic knowledge; that "regular Joe" committee shall number anywhere between 15 and 21. If this regular Joe committee gets wind of a bad traffic law, it can declare that law "fucking stupid" and strike it from the books. The municipality may challenge the USDOT and escalate the problem to the Supreme Court if it so chooses, but the Supreme Court has better things to do and will probably let the regular Joe committee's ruling stand.

Amendment XXXV. Bill Engvall shall be hired on as a government consultant in charge of stupid behavior. Anyone who commits a behavior that is classified as "grossly stupid" shall be subject to the whims of fellow citizens, who may then beat the ever-loving shit out of that citizen for stupidity. These citizens may not cause injury or permanent damage of any sort, but short of that, they may inflict any degree of pain that they inflict.

Amendment XXXVI. The death penalty is banned. Yes, Texas and Ohio, that means you, too. Prisons will be turned into labor camps run by corporations. Let those bastards make a profit off criminals, at least the lifers, anyway. Those who can be rehabilitated should be. The murderers, terrorists, etc.? Fuck 'em. Let the corporations work 'em to death, test experimental drugs on them, or use them as stress relievers for frustrated guards, in whatever way that applies (I'm thinking that they serve as human punching bags, but you may interpret that as you please.) Incidentally, the state of Ohio will be closed off and used as a massive prison camp for all lifers, or at least the city of Columbus will. No one wants to live in that fucking dump, anyway.

Amendnemnt XXXVII. As fucked up as the U.S. is right now, it should be considered unwise to limit changes to just ten amendments.

Amendment XXXVIII. Any idiot who puts the Ten Commandments out on public land shall be declared an idiot, the Ten Commandments shall be removed, and they shall be wrapped in cellophane and rolled down a steep hill. This goes for any other religious monuments or anything that doesn't belong in front of a fucking courthouse.

Amendment XXXIX. Any school administrator or other person who charges anyone younger than 13 with any sort of sexual offense shall be kicked in the face by a weighlifter named either Magnus, Phineas, Barnaby, Hans, Franz, Thor, Arnold, or Bob, or some variant thereof. This weightlifter shall be considered "extremely beefy" and shall wear steel-toed hiking or work boots. The kicking shall be televised across the nation and placed on YouTube within 24 hours. The same goes for suspending students for "zero tolerance" offenses for things such as possession of cough drops, pain reliever, candy, soda, or vitamin water. We have to cover all the bases, because some people are fretty fucking stupid.

Amendment XL. The Westboro Baptist Church shall have its tax-exempt status removed, be declared "not a church," and will be burned to the ground. Fred Phelps will be tattooed with "FUCKING MORON" on his forehead, and it shall be legal to kick him. Anyone who is or was a member shall be declared a fucking moron. Also, the Church of Scientology will lose its tax-exempt status and be re-filed under "crazy fucking cult full of asshat celebrities." Otherwise, it will be left alone, and people will be encouraged to laugh at them.

Amendment XLI. The brightest scientists in the country will be gathered together to design a car that runs off garbage. Any old garbage will do. We can refine it into liquefied garbage and remove the smell, but damnit, it beats the hell out of gasoline-powered cars. And we won't be dependent on foreign oil. Fuck the Saudi royal family.

Amendment XLII. Let it be known that racism and bigotry is a fucking stupid idea, and all races, sexes, creeds, religions, and otherwise groupings of peoples suck equal amounds of shit. Also, cats are allowed to be elected to public office. And dogs. But not stupid dogs.

"No guns pls"
"Have a good one, within reason - this means no Class As, m'kay?"
"don't be a prick, but feel free to say things within reason"
"You have the right, nay, the duty to be polite to the polis, but this is totally reciprocal, just be polite about it"

There we go.

Fuck it, I have just one ammendment to propose, and its all that needs to be proposed.


Ammendment I: The constitution is now repealed and the US Government is dismanteled. I am now Pharoh. My word is law.


Ok, another non-rediculous ammendment:

Only the educated are now allowed to vote. One must have at the very least a degree from some form of 1-2 year higher learning institution in order to vote in any elections. This should prevent people like George Bush or Mike Huckabee from ever getting elected.

My father wrote this and sent it to me about eight months or so ago. I've kept it around partly because I like it so much, and partly because it's a good conversation piece.

PREAMBLE

We, the responsible people of the United States, in an attempt to restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote self-reliance, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish a few basic guidelines for the terminally whiny, the blame junkies, the delusional, and all the other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident, but judging by recent events, a lot of the rest of you are confused. So, one more time for the hard-of-thinking, we present:


THE BILL OF NON-RIGHTS


ARTICLE I:

You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one guarantees anything.

ARTICLE II:

You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you. You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc. but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III:

You do not have the right to be free from harm. Everything that's fun in life is dangerous. And everything that isn't fun is dangerous too. It is impossible to be alive and safe. Life is inherently risky. Get a helmet.

ARTICLE IV:

You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. Whatever happened to ‘If you don’t work, you don’t eat’?

ARTICLE V:

You do not have the right to free health care. Also, stop referring to the idea of socialized medicine as ‘free.’ It’s not free, and you’ll end up paying for it with more than just money. If we want something, we should pay for it, with our labor or our cash. We shouldn't beg it, steal it, sit around wishing for it, or euchre the government into taking it by force.

ARTICLE VI:

You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or murder someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair and sooner, rather than later.

ARTICLE VII:

You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of the citizenry, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII:

You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you and make yourself a useful and productive citizen.

ARTICLE IX:

You do not have the right to happiness. Even the ‘pursuit’ of happiness is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can 'pursue happiness' as long as my brain lives - but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can insure that I will catch it. The pursuit is made easier, though, if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws.

ARTICLE X:

This is an English speaking country. While I’m sure that it was a great place, where you came from is irrelevant. You’re here now, and English is spoken here. Learn it. If you have trouble, ask someone and they’ll help, but ask them in English.

ARTICLE XI:

You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in the one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in a religion, all religions, or no religion at all with no fear of persecution. However, language and phrases that reflect this heritage, such as ‘In God We Trust’ are a part of the history of this country, and if you are uncomfortable with it, well, see Articles II and IX.

ARTICLE XI:

You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in the one true God.

Cute, however this last one is blatantly false. Its funny that this says not to change our country's history, and the very next sentence changes this country's history.

Amendment I - Religion shall not be taught nor represented in any official form in any state education facility

Amendment II - No individual or organisation shall spend more than $500,000 in any complete electoral campaign.

Amendment III - All citizens have the right to healthcare, shelter and the minimum means to ensure a dignified daily life without recourse to begging, vagrancy or any illegal activity.

Amendment IV - No citizen except one empowered as such by the state has there right to bear any firearm.

Amendment V - No citizen may intentionally take the life of another to protect material goods.

Amendment VI - All citizens have the right to a fair trial, including the option of having their trial conducted in a neutral country under US law.

Amendment VII - The government may hold no person without trial.

Amendment VIII - All land holdings of more than $500,000,000 value, 150 sq. miles of fertile land or 1000 sq. miles of barren land are to remain the property of the state for all time.

Amendment IX - All water courses and permanent rights of way are to remain the property of the state for all time.

Amendment X - All agricultural estates, mineral concessions or industrial concerns individually yielding more than 7.5% of total national output of any one commodity shall remain the property of the state for all time.

"Fair voting amendment" - those holding the office of President, Vice President, or Representative or Senator of Congress shall be elected via a popular approval vote of citizens within the nation, state, or district which they serve.

"Lowered age of franchise amendment" - The age for voting reduced to 16.

"By consent of the governed amendment" - Each territory, colony, and nation, whether sovereign, hostile, subordinate, or allied, which plays host to military forces of the United States or is subject to governance by the United States, are entitled to a Senator and a number of Representatives proportionate to their population. [To be elected in accordance with the "Fair voting amendment" above. May need some tightening around the citizenship clauses.]

"Right to education" (compulsory education already set forth in state law) Each and every lawful resident of the United States is entitled to a free and fair education, at least until after attaining their majority.

"Right to health care" A universal health care amendment. Details TBD. May turn out to be nebulous.

"Universal sufferage" - No person, having once attained legal citizenship, and not having voluntarily relinquished that citizenship, may be barred the right to vote. [If they are physically or mentally unable to vote, that is of course another matter...]

My father wrote this and sent it to me about eight months or so ago. I've kept it around partly because I like it so much, and partly because it's a good conversation piece.

-snip bs-

I doubt your father wrote it. I know I've seen that piece posted by conservatives on other forums.

My father wrote this

Then either you, or your father, is a bold faced liar, because your father didn't write shit. It was written by a libertarian nut job (http://web.archive.org/web/20030801200633/http://www.lp.org/lpnews/0010/campaign2000.html)named Lewis Napper 15 years ago.

Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/language/document/norights.asp) has an article on it. As it circulated across the net various parts were added from the original, which changed it from just a poorly drafted piece of nonsense into a poordly drafted uber nationalist piece of right wing rhetoric with racists undertones that neo cons and "libertarians" can read while they wack off to thoughts of killing poor black people.

Amendment I - Religion shall not be taught nor represented in any official form in any state education facility

Amendment II - No individual or organisation shall spend more than $500,000 in any complete electoral campaign.

Amendment III - All citizens have the right to healthcare, shelter and the minimum means to ensure a dignified daily life without recourse to begging, vagrancy or any illegal activity.

Amendment IV - No citizen except one empowered as such by the state has there right to bear any firearm.

Amendment V - No citizen may intentionally take the life of another to protect material goods.

Amendment VI - All citizens have the right to a fair trial, including the option of having their trial conducted in a neutral country under US law.

Amendment VII - The government may hold no person without trial.

Amendment VIII - All land holdings of more than $500,000,000 value, 150 sq. miles of fertile land or 1000 sq. miles of barren land are to remain the property of the state for all time.

Amendment IX - All water courses and permanent rights of way are to remain the property of the state for all time.

Amendment X - All agricultural estates, mineral concessions or industrial concerns individually yielding more than 7.5% of total national output of any one commodity shall remain the property of the state for all time.

Except for #7, this list scares the crap out of me. I'd rather be buggered by 10,000 angry grizzly bears than any of it coming true. Why? Because they're ALL anti-American. The only reason why I'm okay with #7 is because it already exists.
(And before anyone goes screaming about GitMo: The whole topic has been covered to death already.)

1. States shall no longer determine their own primaries individually. The first primary shall occur on the first Monday of the first full week in January. Two states shall vote on that day. The next shall occur a week later, the next a week after that. The order shall be randomly determined one week before the election, by a panel of experts appointed by the states.
2. Nobody shall have the right to not be offended by others exercising their freedom of expression.
3. The government shall be required to ensure access to essential healthcare for all citizens, regardless of financial situation.
4. The Department of Defense shall be renamed the Department of War.
5. Foreign-born citizens may run for the Presidency, provided that they have resided in the United States for the majority of their life.

I'll post some more later.

1. States shall no longer determine their own primaries individually. The first primary shall occur on the first Monday of the first full week in January. Two states shall vote on that day. The next shall occur a week later, the next a week after that. The order shall be randomly determined one week before the election, by a panel of experts appointed by the states.
2. Nobody shall have the right to not be offended by others exercising their freedom of expression.
3. The government shall be required to ensure access to essential healthcare for all citizens, regardless of financial situation.
4. The Department of Defense shall be renamed the Department of War.
5. Foreign-born citizens may run for the Presidency, provided that they have resided in the United States for the majority of their life.

I'll post some more later.

I can see the first 4 (assuming #3 has some limiting provisions), but #5 is a complete non-starter for me. By that logic, someone could move here when they're 30, live here for 31 years and run for President. That's just plain a bad idea. I'll point to Royal Poland as an example of what happens when a country imports their leadership.

Amendment XXVIII

The Constitution, and all powers granted by it, are hereby repealed.

Except for #7, this list scares the crap out of me. I'd rather be buggered by 10,000 angry grizzly bears than any of it coming true. Why? Because they're ALL anti-American. The only reason why I'm okay with #7 is because it already exists.
(And before anyone goes screaming about GitMo: The whole topic has been covered to death already.)

How are #1 and #6 anti-American? Hell, #1 is pretty much the freaking establishment clause.

Foreign-born citizens may run for the Presidency, provided that they have resided in the United States for the majority of their life.

I'll post some more later.

Why don't we go a step farther. Let's disband America and give it to Iran, Cuba, China, and North Korea

How are #1 and #6 anti-American? Hell, #1 is pretty much the freaking establishment clause.

#1 is not actually so bad, but is discriminatory against certain communities (ie: Amish, Native Americans). I'm not saying that Roman Catholicism should be taught in schools, I AM saying that it Freedom From Religion should not be in the Constitution.

#6 is a HUGE soverignty issue.

#1 is not actually so bad, but is discriminatory against certain communities (ie: Amish, Native Americans). I'm not saying that Roman Catholicism should be taught in schools, I AM saying that it Freedom From Religion should not be in the Constitution.
Since Amish and Native American communities are not part of the government, I fail to see how it's discriminatory towards them. Also, freedom from religion is in the Constitution. One cannot have freedom of religion without freedom from religion.

#6 is a HUGE soverignty issue.
How so? The U.S. laws still apply.

Then either you, or your father, is a bold faced liar, because your father didn't write shit. It was written by a libertarian nut job named Lewis Napper 15 years ago.

Yeah, when it comes to a choice between a man I've known for thirty years who has never lied to me about anything important...and some clown on the Internet...I'm going to have to hold to the former, and not the latter.

...a poordly drafted uber nationalist piece of right wing rhetoric with racists undertones that neo cons and "libertarians" can read while they wack off to thoughts of killing poor black people.

Much like Jesse and Al getting incensed about commercials, or radio shows, or whatever foolishness they get up to to justify their paychecks, I think you've dug out more than actually exists. There are no 'undertones', racist or otherwise. The piece pretty much comes out and says what it means. Having read it through a couple of times, I fail to find anything in there that could even be construed as alluding to killing poor black people.

Oh, and just FYI, if you're going to be 'King Grammar' and condescend to all the poor ignorant wretches, you might want to proof-read your scathing critques there, Junior.

Since Amish and Native American communities are not part of the government, I fail to see how it's discriminatory towards them. Also, freedom from religion is in the Constitution. One cannot have freedom of religion without freedom from religion.


How so? The U.S. laws still apply.

Yes, they actually are. The Federal Government is the highest court on any Reservation, and the Amish *are* also citizens. My point is that such a law would eliminate ANY display of any religion in public. And that's just not right.

Not necessarily. By saying that "including the option of having their trial conducted in a neutral country under US law." is a farce. Just choose to be tried in a country where what you did was not illegal. Or they don't speak anything near your language. *BOOM* hung jury, or no penalty. Heck, what's a neutral country?

Yes, they actually are. The Federal Government is the highest court on any Reservation, and the Amish *are* also citizens. My point is that such a law would eliminate ANY display of any religion in public. And that's just not right.

No, it wouldn't, considering that it only applies to public schools.

Yeah, when it comes to a choice between a man I've known for thirty years who has never lied to me about anything important...and some clown on the Internet...I'm going to have to hold to the former, and not the latter.

Neo Art linked the origin of it. None so blind as those who refuse to see, and all that jazz.

No, it wouldn't, considering that it only applies to public schools.

1) What's a public school? I know that the NYC and New Haven, CT (and probably a host of other public school systems) that rent space from private schools and they already move the Crucifix/Star of David, don't wear uniforms, etc.
2) It's a short walk from "state education facility" to anything else. One can (and someone WILL) that museums, parks, jails, zoos and who knows what else are educational facilities.
3) Is this thing really worthy of an Amendment to just say no religion in schools, when there is already so much local and state law already saying as much?

...and that for some groups (ie: Amish, Native Americans) it would be pretty much impossible to have cultural studies without mentioning religion.

Yes, they actually are. The Federal Government is the highest court on any Reservation, and the Amish *are* also citizens. My point is that such a law would eliminate ANY display of any religion in public. And that's just not right.

Not necessarily. By saying that "including the option of having their trial conducted in a neutral country under US law." is a farce. Just choose to be tried in a country where what you did was not illegal. Or they don't speak anything near your language. *BOOM* hung jury, or no penalty. Heck, what's a neutral country?

under US law in other words, the legal code remains the same. The reason for this is for cases where an unbiased trial would not otherwise be possible, due to over publicity of a case or the high profile nature of an indivudal. Such a system was used in the UK to try the Lockerbie bombers. In the end they went on trial in the netherlands, but under UK law. A system both the UK and Libya (where they were from) agreed to be a fair and just solution.

As for display of religion, please try to think rationally. We are talking of state school facilities here (In hindsight, I would extend this to any state building), not what people do in their own homes or in their local church/mosque/temple.

Yeah, when it comes to a choice between a man I've known for thirty years who has never lied to me about anything important...and some clown on the Internet...I'm going to have to hold to the former, and not the latter.



Considering there is a link to the original...

One of you is a liar, and your deliberatially ignorant.


This is when you say you misspoke, your dad didnt right it but sent it to you, all that jazz.

Or you know, keep lying.

Amendment XXXToolazytoolookuplatest: The Fedral and state governments combined may impose taxes no greater then 7% of the average persons income.

Amendment XXXItoolazytolookuplatestamendment: No laws can be imposed restricting acts between 2 or more consenting adults.

Amendment XXXIIToolazytoolookuplatestamendment: The federal government may spend no more than 90% of what it makes from taxes per year. Including Tariffs.

28th Amendment: No person shall have the right to not be offended

29th Amendment: All persons shall have the right to anonymity through the Internet and speech made there

30th ": No State, County or Municipality shall pass laws restricting the Constitution or Amendments of it (refers specifically to 1st, 2nd, and all concerning race.

31st ": No person shall be discriminated against due to sex/gender identity, race, religion, dress, etc

32nd: Religion shall not be taught in Public Schools, but no citizen has the right pf Freedom From Religion

33nd ": All intoxicating drugs are no longer prohibited, but public intoxication will not be tolerated, nor will intoxocation be used as legal defense.

34th ": Freedom of Language is to be upheld

35th ": No citizen shall be entitled to Welfare payments beyond one (1) year without demonstrating valid excuse

36th ": No citizen shall be forced to purchase health insurance, nor shall they expect taxpayer-provided healthcare

37th ': No citizen shall be forced or compelled to join or retain membership within a Labour Union

Now that I have the time to dissect this nationalistic, uber right dominionist nonsense...


THE BILL OF NON-RIGHTS


ARTICLE I:

You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one guarantees anything.

Fair enough. I sense the racist undertown however "ALL BLACK PEOPLE ARE TEH WELFARE LEECHES!!!!"

ARTICLE II:

You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you. You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc. but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

Funny, coming from the guy who claims to be the mighty defende of the flag and beats up protesters unprovoked by anything other then him taking offense to said protester burning a flag.

ARTICLE III:

You do not have the right to be free from harm. Everything that's fun in life is dangerous. And everything that isn't fun is dangerous too. It is impossible to be alive and safe. Life is inherently risky. Get a helmet.

This makes me chuckle seeing it posted by a conservative since conservatives want to "ban sin".

ARTICLE IV:

You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. Whatever happened to ‘If you don’t work, you don’t eat’?

See comment about racist undertones of black people being welfare leeches. And the idea that Americans are the most charitable people to be found is funny.

ARTICLE V:

You do not have the right to free health care. Also, stop referring to the idea of socialized medicine as ‘free.’ It’s not free, and you’ll end up paying for it with more than just money. If we want something, we should pay for it, with our labor or our cash. We shouldn't beg it, steal it, sit around wishing for it, or euchre the government into taking it by force.

The socialized medicine is teh debil point. Was waiting for that one.

ARTICLE VI:

You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or murder someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair and sooner, rather than later.


Funny coming from the masked avenger who beats up peaceful protesters. See prior comment.

ARTICLE VII:

You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of the citizenry, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

Dont steal. Thats insightful.

ARTICLE VIII:

You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you and make yourself a useful and productive citizen.

Ignoring socio-economic factors, saying that all poor people are lazy, AND saying that they dont have a right to work anyway, all in one comment!

ARTICLE IX:

You do not have the right to happiness. Even the ‘pursuit’ of happiness is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can 'pursue happiness' as long as my brain lives - but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can insure that I will catch it. The pursuit is made easier, though, if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws.

This one I dont really get. All though its funny to quote directly from the Declaration and say "Yeah, the persuit of happiness is unalienable but its not a right, TJ misspoke." I sense logical disconnect.

ARTICLE X:

This is an English speaking country. While I’m sure that it was a great place, where you came from is irrelevant. You’re here now, and English is spoken here. Learn it. If you have trouble, ask someone and they’ll help, but ask them in English.

Yep, the ebil Mexicans DEY TOOK ER JERBS! comment, the one you can always count on from xenophobic "libertarians".

ARTICLE XI:

You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in the one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in a religion, all religions, or no religion at all with no fear of persecution. However, language and phrases that reflect this heritage, such as ‘In God We Trust’ are a part of the history of this country, and if you are uncomfortable with it, well, see Articles II and IX.

Ive already pointed out whats funny about this but it bears mentioning again. This country was not founed on a belief in God. Saying that is rewriting history, which is a direct contradiction to the first sentence in this "ammendment". Also, in God We Trust was added to our money and Under God added to the pledge during the Cold War, 100+ years after we were founded. So that also reeks of either historical ignorance or rewrite.


You should be glad your dad didnt right this kiddo, because that make him as big of a moron as the guy who did.

29th Amendment: All persons shall have the right to anonymity through the Internet and speech made there



Those sexual predators sure will be happy.

Yeah, when it comes to a choice between a man I've known for thirty years who has never lied to me about anything important...and some clown on the Internet...I'm going to have to hold to the former, and not the latter. Well, either your father is Lewis Napper, or he isn't, and he didn't write this drivel. Which is it? Are you Napper Jr, or not?

You just had your ass handed to you, in front of all these people...and all you have to say is 'um well, yeah, despite the evidence, if I cover my ears and go lalalalalalala, it'll all go away and I won't be a ridiculous liar'.



Oh, and just FYI, if you're going to be 'King Grammar' and condescend to all the poor ignorant wretches, you might want to proof-read your scathing critques there, Junior.

Let me reiterate...you got your ass handed to you.

Trying to diss a lawyer for skills he doesn't need (hint: secretaries type the shit up) in order to attempt to save face, only serves to make you look more silly. That's all you got? "Oh yeah well um, you got, um you got BAD grammar! Ha! I showed you!"

I mean seriously. Who lies like this? When it's so easy to verify that you are in fact a liar? That's just...pathetic.

Well, either your father is Lewis Napper, or he isn't, and he didn't write this drivel. Which is it? Are you Napper Jr, or not?

You just had your ass handed to you, in front of all these people...and all you have to say is 'um well, yeah, despite the evidence, if I cover my ears and go lalalalalalala, it'll all go away and I won't be a ridiculous liar'.



Let me reiterate...you got your ass handed to you.

Trying to diss a lawyer for skills he doesn't need (hint: secretaries type the shit up) in order to attempt to save face, only serves to make you look more silly. That's all you got? "Oh yeah well um, you got, um you got BAD grammar! Ha! I showed you!"

I mean seriously. Who lies like this? When it's so easy to verify that you are in fact a liar? That's just...pathetic.

Between this and the flag burning thing, Id say hes pretty much done as a poster IMO.

Okay, here's the scenario: for some reason or other, you've been asked to produce a second bill of rights for the US. Due to public demand, you can add up to ten nonridiculous things as new amendments to the US constitution. What would you put in?

1. The rights of personhood so listed in this document shall not be construed to confer rights or privileges upon abstract legal entities, and no entity that cannot meet the requirements of personhood shall be appointed the status of legal personhood.

2. The right to life and dignity of personhood being integral to the integrity of a free state, no state may torture or condemn to death any citizen, nor may any state torture or condemn to death any member of another nation save by means in accord with all legal arrangements between the states. Lack of such arrangements shall be construed to mean no right to torture or condemn to death by the state.

3. No convicted defendent, civil or criminal, shall upon his release be assumed to remain disenfranchised.

I'm still trying to think of a way to do away with the appaling Korematsu decision, but I can't think of any way to do it. But that's pretty much what I've got at the moment.

Now that I have the time to dissect this nationalistic, uber right dominionist nonsense...

Don't get me wrong: that piece is incoherent, right-wing drivel and there's certainly xenophobia towards Mexicans there; but I'm not seeing the racist anti-black undertones you're referring to.

1. Abortion is illegal in recognition of a child's right to life
2. marriage= 1 man and 1 woman
3. The pledge of allegiance becomes part of the constitution.
4. foreign detainees have rights
5. Smoking is illegal
6. National animal is hereby declared the gray wolf
7. Lobbying is illegal
8. Selling weapons to Israel is illegal
9. Capital punishment abolished
10. Freedom of religion holds an exception for Satanic cults

1. Abortion is illegal in recognition of a child's right to life
2. marriage= 1 man and 1 woman
3. The pledge of allegiance becomes part of the constitution.
4. foreign detainees have rights
5. Smoking is illegal
6. National animal is hereby declared the gray wolf
7. Lobbying is illegal
8. Selling weapons to Israel is illegal
9. Capital punishment abolished
10. Freedom of religion holds an exception for Satanic cults


Why dont you just come out and declare Christianity the state religion?

1. Abortion is illegal in recognition of a child's right to life
2. marriage= 1 man and 1 woman
3. The pledge of allegiance becomes part of the constitution.
4. foreign detainees have rights
5. Smoking is illegal
6. National animal is hereby declared the gray wolf
7. Lobbying is illegal
8. Selling weapons to Israel is illegal
9. Capital punishment abolished
10. Freedom of religion holds an exception for Satanic cults

lolwut?

under US law in other words, the legal code remains the same. The reason for this is for cases where an unbiased trial would not otherwise be possible, due to over publicity of a case or the high profile nature of an indivudal. Such a system was used in the UK to try the Lockerbie bombers. In the end they went on trial in the netherlands, but under UK law. A system both the UK and Libya (where they were from) agreed to be a fair and just solution.

As for display of religion, please try to think rationally. We are talking of state school facilities here (In hindsight, I would extend this to any state building), not what people do in their own homes or in their local church/mosque/temple.

I still am baffled why you think that someone whom could not an unbiased trial in the US would get one anywhere else: if it is a regional issue, there are plenty of places in the US to move it to. If it's international (like Lockerbie), then it's a moot point anyway as we're talking about a dispute between nations. I doubt that the UK would consider sending the Tube bombers (had one lived) to Indonesia to be tried, for example.

I *am* being rational. I've said I don't endorse the teaching of religion in state schools, but there are places that should be excepted.
I also believe that there is nothing wrong with a Christmas tree or Star of David on a town green, etc, or any icon during a holiday. The Jaycees, the Klan and the Catholic Women's League (or whatever) all have equal rights to use of public space. Freedom of Religion does not mean Freedom From Religion.

Good thing a lot of these posters are not in charge of running the show.

Then either you, or your father, is a bold faced liar, because your father didn't write shit. It was written by a libertarian nut job (http://web.archive.org/web/20030801200633/http://www.lp.org/lpnews/0010/campaign2000.html)named Lewis Napper 15 years ago.

OR his father is Lewis Napper.

Ive already pointed out whats funny about this but it bears mentioning again. This country was not founed on a belief in God. Saying that is rewriting history, which is a direct contradiction to the first sentence in this "ammendment". Also, in God We Trust was added to our money and Under God added to the pledge during the Cold War, 100+ years after we were founded. So that also reeks of either historical ignorance or rewrite.

"In God We Trust" was actually added to the money back during the Civil War.

1: Revised equal rights amendment: All citizens of the United States are equal under the law. No one may be discriminated against due to race, religion (or lack thereof), gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, political beliefs or Nation of origin. (am I forgetting anyone here?)

2: Consenting adults have the right to marry any other consenting adult. marriage of more than two persons requires the consent of all persons involved.

3: Everyone has a right to an equal standard of medical care.

4: Food and shelter are rights. Lobster and Mansions are not.

5: Abortion is a right.

6: The electoral college is abolished. One person one vote.

I might add four more if I think of them. I'm trying to figure out how to fund peoples campaigns if political parties are abolished.

"In God We Trust" was actually added to the money back during the Civil War.

And IIRC, later removed only to be re-added to distance ourselves from the Godless Commies.

Just one amendment:

All legal documents, including the constitution, must be interpreted exactly and only as written, with no heed paid to the actual or possible intent of the authors.

1: Revised equal rights amendment: All citizens of the United States are equal under the law. No one may be discriminated against due to race, religion (or lack thereof), gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, political beliefs or Nation of origin. (am I forgetting anyone here?)

2: Consenting adults have the right to marry any other consenting adult. marriage of more than two persons requires the consent of all persons involved.

3: Everyone has a right to an equal standard of medical care.

Cool, I get to pay for other people making crappy health choices and paying their high premiums.

4: Food and shelter are rights. Lobster and Mansions are not.

Awesome. I get to pay for people on welfare having children when they shouldn't on my tax-payer dollar.

5: Abortion is a right.

6: The electoral college is abolished. One person one vote.

Cool. At least I'll be in a state (one of three) that will feature election campaigns for the presidency and actually count.

I might add four more if I think of them. I'm trying to figure out how to fund peoples campaigns if political parties are abolished.

In bold.

I still am baffled why you think that someone whom could not an unbiased trial in the US would get one anywhere else: if it is a regional issue, there are plenty of places in the US to move it to. If it's international (like Lockerbie), then it's a moot point anyway as we're talking about a dispute between nations. I doubt that the UK would consider sending the Tube bombers (had one lived) to Indonesia to be tried, for example.

I am talking national issues not regional issues. The Lockerbie example is exactly the kind of situation where a law like this is necessary. The Lockerbie people couldn't have had a fair trial here, nor was the UK happy to let their own country try them, so a neutral third country was a sensible solution. It is the same as sending people to The Hague for trial for war crimes rather than their own country.

I *am* being rational. I've said I don't endorse the teaching of religion in state schools, but there are places that should be excepted.

Once again, I never said everywhere. I said state buildings. That is, buildings that are owned by the state.

Or....maybe I'm just fucking with the lot of you. Maybe I do things like this on purpose just to watch all you master debaters go nuts behind it. It's like watching monkeys fight for peanuts at the zoo, except it's cheaper, and this I can do at work.

Although, I have to say, the monkeys at the zoo are, on the whole, more entertaining than the monkeys here. I think it's the expressions on their little monkey faces that does it.

Or....maybe I'm just fucking with the lot of you. Maybe I do things like this on purpose just to watch all you master debaters go nuts behind it. It's like watching monkeys fight for peanuts at the zoo, except it's cheaper, and this I can do at work.

Although, I have to say, the monkeys at the zoo are, on the whole, more entertaining than the monkeys here. I think it's the expressions on their little monkey faces that does it.

Ah.

So you admit you're a troll?

We've had better.

Ah.

So you admit you're a troll?

We've had better.

I'd say it's hard to think of ones we've had that were worse, but we seem to attract some pretty shitty trolls.

1. You do not have the right to not be offended. If someone offends you, either offend them right back or shut up.

2. You do not have the right to freedom from religion. America shall not become Atheistland. Not everyone agrees with you. Stop ironically acting like you are God's gift to humanity. Get over yourself.

3. You are not garanteed free food, housing, or healthcare. Most people work harder if they want more. This isn't Pinkocommieland. Nobody likes a leech.

4. Self esteem is not a garanteed right. You want a trophy? Don't lose the freak'n race. Want an A+? Study. Want praise? Do something useful and productive or at least show some talent and dedication.

5. City/town, county, state, and federal governments shall not grant priviliges and/or aid to a person or group of poeple on basis of belief, race, gender, sexual identity, or what happened to an ancestor or ancestors that has/have been dead for 100 or more years.

6. The electoral college shall be changed. Each state's electoral votes shall always go to the candidate that the majority of voters from said state voted for. This will be the law rather than just an option.

7. Shut up. I mean it.

8. English is the official language of the nation. All other languages are completely legal to speak, write, teach, and learn, but english is the language of the nation. Citizens, native or naturalized, and legal aliens shall not be required by any law to learn any language other than english.

9. Yes, that does make you look fat.

Or....maybe I'm just fucking with the lot of you. Maybe I do things like this on purpose just to watch all you master debaters go nuts behind it. It's like watching monkeys fight for peanuts at the zoo, except it's cheaper, and this I can do at work.

Although, I have to say, the monkeys at the zoo are, on the whole, more entertaining than the monkeys here. I think it's the expressions on their little monkey faces that does it.

Nah, I think now, after getting called out, you just are trying to save a little face. Cant say a blame you.

1
2. You do not have the right to freedom from religion. America shall not become Atheistland. Not everyone agrees with you. Stop ironically acting like you are God's gift to humanity. Get over yourself.



Replace Athiest with Christian and this becomes truth.

All right, its on. This is my fucking constitution.

1. Freedom of speech, press, and assembly. Things that hurt your feelings will not be censored. Things you deem inappropriate for children will not be censored. Dont like it? Dont take your kids to R rated movies or buy them M rated games. Dont like the KKK rallying? Ignore them, or counter protest. Dont like the flag burning? Get the fuck over it.

2. You must deal with the consequences of your actions. You do not have the freedom to hide behind scapegoats or things like religion. If you say that gay people are abominations, dont be suprised if people call you a homophobic asshat. And no, your religion is not an excuse.

3. The government has no right to interfere with the personal affairs of anybody as long as its consenting. This includes things like who they marry, who they boink, how many people they marry or how many people they boink. As long as its consential, its none of your business, shut the fuck up.

4. The government has no authority over what substances you put in your body.

5. Everybody has the right to due process

6. Everybody gets humane treatment. The death penalty is not humane, no matter what you do. Nor is torture.

7. What people do in their homes is their own business. No wiretapping without a court order, which is required for ALL searches, seizures, etc.

8. A FETUS IS NOT A HUMAN LIFE

9. Only the educated are here by allowed to vote. Educated is defined as demonstrating a clear grasp of the issues and a degree of some sort from an institution of higher learning or vocational school

10. Organized religions are here by banned. You can have whatever personal beliefs you want in the privacy of your own home. This doesnt mean you cant talk about it. You just dont have leadership anymore, which will make it harder for idiot fundies to force it down our throats. Keep your fairy tales out of our schools and our lives, especially if we dont want to fucking here about it.

Or....maybe I'm just fucking with the lot of you. Maybe I do things like this on purpose just to watch all you master debaters go nuts behind it. It's like watching monkeys fight for peanuts at the zoo, except it's cheaper, and this I can do at work.

Although, I have to say, the monkeys at the zoo are, on the whole, more entertaining than the monkeys here. I think it's the expressions on their little monkey faces that does it.

Hmm.... maybe I'm warning you for trolling.
No, wait, no maybe about it.

Okay, here's the scenario: for some reason or other, you've been asked to produce a second bill of rights for the US. Due to public demand, you can add up to ten nonridiculous things as new amendments to the US constitution. What would you put in?

The first 10 again for emphasis with the words "whatever bullshit you want to spout Scallia," added to them.

Good thing a lot of these posters are not in charge of running the show.

I'll agree with that.

All rights and clauses of this constitution shall apply to residents as well as citizens of the United States. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of migration.
Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of production and trade.
If the President goes to war and is judged in a referendum to have lost, he and all members of congress who voted in favour of it shall be held responsible personally for damages caused and lives lost according to criminal law.
All rights and clauses of this constitution shall apply to any and all US government departments and institutions, as well as agents thereof both in US territory and outside it.
Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of scientific progress.

Can't think of any more right now.

I'll agree with that.

Too bad there are a lot of people who share their opinion and are running the show.

we haven't shoveled people into ovens on an industrial scale...

we haven't forcibly relocated farmers to starve them and sent city people to the farms by force to try and farm....

we don't have the Chavez/Mugabe "you'll make the economy work the way we say" policies...

we haven't done the Pol Pot thing yet...

In terms of the sheer number of people killed pointlessly by the government's actions, we don't come close to the "rest of the world"
Your history is slightly better than the combined history of the entire world, is that your point?

1. Abortion is illegal in recognition of a child's right to life
2. marriage= 1 man and 1 woman
3. The pledge of allegiance becomes part of the constitution.
4. foreign detainees have rights
5. Smoking is illegal
6. National animal is hereby declared the gray wolf
7. Lobbying is illegal
8. Selling weapons to Israel is illegal
9. Capital punishment abolished
10. Freedom of religion holds an exception for Satanic cultsOh goody. Freedom of religion except for non-Catholics.

I see some good amendments and some really bad amendments (duh). Seriously, though, I'd include amendments like this:

(1) No religion-based laws shall be passed.

(2) Marriages are legal for all pairs of consenting, single adults. Divorces are legal for every pair of married adults.

(3) No person shall be executed or sentenced to death. Those currently on death row shall have their sentences commtued to life without parole.

(4) All elections shall be direct elections.

(5) All citizens have the basic rights of food, water, shelter, and basic health care.

(6) No minor shall be forced or coerced to follow a religion (or lack thereof) they do not wish to follow, nor shall they be deprived of food, water, shelter, or basic health care.

(7) All religions are required to pay taxes and oppose religious violence.

(8) No persons shall be discriminated against based on religion (or the lack thereof), gender, age, sexual preference(s), ethnicity, or birthplace.

(9) All residents have the right to get an abortion.

Yes, my liberal viewpoint is somewhat cynical thanks to sharia and other offensive "holy book" statements. Nevertheless, I feel that these would be good for the US. And as for #8, it needs to be boosted from "federal law" to "constitutional amendment".

I am talking national issues not regional issues. The Lockerbie example is exactly the kind of situation where a law like this is necessary. The Lockerbie people couldn't have had a fair trial here, nor was the UK happy to let their own country try them, so a neutral third country was a sensible solution. It is the same as sending people to The Hague for trial for war crimes rather than their own country.

Once again, I never said everywhere. I said state buildings. That is, buildings that are owned by the state.

If you're talking about INTERnational issues, there is no need for an Amendment as it becomes a matter of International Law.
If you're talking about National issues, it's a US issue and the case cannot be shipped overseas as that's a direct violation of soverignty.

The Lockerbie incident was INTERnational, not National. It is not a valid example of what you're advocating. The plane was American, the people onboard were mostly American (190 or so), 11 UK citizens were killed on the ground, and the 2 Libyans that were accused of planting the bomb were of course Libyan.
...and let's go into even MORE detail: the case was tried at Camp Zeist, which is a Scottish Court set up on an old American air base and was done ONLY so that Colonel Gaddafi would extradite the two criminals.
Camp Zeist was declared sovereign territory of the United Kingdom, governed by Scots law, under a treaty signed by the British and Dutch governments.
This is most certainly NOT the same as sending someone to the Hague, which operates under International Law!

ERGO: This was a deal made on an international level just to get the criminals into the court room. A Constitutional Amendement allowing for anyone to be tried anywhere under US law in this manner is a joke: all it does is waste gasoline. If someone commits a murder in Atlanta, they can hold a trial in Boston or LA just as well as Dresden or Tokyo.
______________

The concept already exists in law. There is no public school prayer, there is no teaching of The Bible or Torah or Koran, etc. But what is being proposed WOULD take an important right away from some groups, and I'm against that. Also, most school buildings are not owned by the state, but by their local townships. Are you saying you only want a ban on religious education in state-run colleges, for example? Of course not! But that's another hole in the concept.
There is no need for an Amendment to cover something which is ALREADY covered in 1st:
"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."
...if some groups WANT to have G*d in the classroom (Amish, Native Americans, etc), that's their RIGHT. You can opt out of it and go to a different school.

1: Revised equal rights amendment: All citizens of the United States are equal under the law. No one may be discriminated against due to race, religion (or lack thereof), gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, political beliefs or Nation of origin. (am I forgetting anyone here?)

2: Consenting adults have the right to marry any other consenting adult. marriage of more than two persons requires the consent of all persons involved.

3: Everyone has a right to an equal standard of medical care.

4: Food and shelter are rights. Lobster and Mansions are not.

5: Abortion is a right.

6: The electoral college is abolished. One person one vote.

I might add four more if I think of them. I'm trying to figure out how to fund peoples campaigns if political parties are abolished.

1. That's the 9th, 15th, & 19th Amendments, along with the rest of the Constitution.

2. Fine.

3. Hell no. This is America, and you buy what you want. You also don't have the right to a job, but the opportunity to get one.

4. No, they're not. Food and shelter are yours to buy, if you choose.

5. No, it isn't, but it (like all other rights) are subject ultimately to the Supreme Court. As the Court decides on cases involving Free Speech, Gun Control, etc, it also decides on Abortion. Felons may not vote, the insane are not given gun licenses, and you can't say that burning down the Jehovah Witness Hall is protected by Free Speech. Likewise, while Abortion is legal, it may be restrained.

6. Then you just destroyed the Constitution. ELECTING THE PRESIDENT IS A POWER RESERVED FOR THE STATES. If you go to a direct popular vote, the states no longer matter and all Presidents now are elected by an NFLocracy, plus Los Angeles.
The Electoral College is one of the best best things ever done to form the Union. That its House Reps + # of Senators is pure genious: it lets small states actually have SOME import, but not enough to override the large states.
If this ever happened, the Union would likely dissolve.

Alright, here are some of the amendments that I would propose to the United States Constitution

a) The United States Government would be obligated to maintain a balanced budget over the longer term, and would only be permitted to keep debt at a level not greater than 40% of GDP. Amendments to spending bills would only be allowed to be within the scope of the original bill (i.e. pork barrel spending would not be attached to military bills)

b) The House of Representatives would be elected using a proportional based electoral system. The status quo would remain for the Senate.

c) Presidental elections would be required to occur on the first Saturday of November every fourth year, with all other elections also required to occur on a Saturday

d) Non US born people would be permitted to run for President, provided that they have been American citizens for a period of at least twenty-five years.

I've got a better idea: Imma rewrite the entire Constitution. Be back in a few days with the PDF.

6. Then you just destroyed the Constitution. ELECTING THE PRESIDENT IS A POWER RESERVED FOR THE STATES. If you go to a direct popular vote, the states no longer matter and all Presidents now are elected by an NFLocracy, plus Los Angeles.
The Electoral College is one of the best best things ever done to form the Union. That its House Reps + # of Senators is pure genious: it lets small states actually have SOME import, but not enough to override the large states.
If this ever happened, the Union would likely dissolve.
One day, I'm going to try and understand this mentality. To me (as someone who hasn't grown up in the USA) it's completely bizarre.

One day, I'm going to try and understand this mentality. To me (as someone who hasn't grown up in the USA) it's completely bizarre.

They have this strange fear that if people in the smaller states don't get more powerful votes, they'll be marginalized.

Instead, they'd rather have a system where New York, Los Angeles, etc... are marginalized.

They have this strange fear that if people in the smaller states don't get more powerful votes, they'll be marginalized.

Instead, they'd rather have a system where New York, Los Angeles, etc... are marginalized.
Well, I don't think New York and Los Angeles are particulary marginalised. After all, California and New York aren't exactly short in the electoral college, I think.

To me, though, it just seems rather odd that a government should be selected by geographic units rather than by the people directly, and in such a way that means the loser of the popular vote can win the electoral college vote. Most MPs in the British Parliament represent urban constituencies (a Premierleagueocracy, if you will) and I've yet to see anybody suggest that this ought to change. To me, suggesting that the President of the USA not be elected directly because New York and Los Angeles would dominate the system (which I would dispute anyway) is like suggesting London ought to have as many seats in Parliament as Rutland in order to prevent London centricism. Or that Anchorage and Fairbanks ought to have as much say over selecting the Governor of Alaska as the (virtually uninhabited) rest of the state.

If New York and Los Angeles have a greater population than a small rural settlement in Nebraska, it makes sense to me that New York and Los Angeles have a greater say in accordance with population. (EDIT: although, on reflection, with the electoral college abolished, it doesn't really make sense to talk of places being represented, as the only votes that count will be those of individuals, rather than places, and people who vote for the less popular candidate in area will still have their vote count.)

There should be mechanisms to ensure minority interests are represented (like the US Senate), but they shouldn't dominate over one man, one vote.

ARTICLE IV:

You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. Whatever happened to ‘If you don’t work, you don’t eat’?

ARTICLE V:
You do not have the right to free health care. Also, stop referring to the idea of socialized medicine as ‘free.’ It’s not free, and you’ll end up paying for it with more than just money. If we want something, we should pay for it, with our labor or our cash. We shouldn't beg it, steal it, sit around wishing for it, or euchre the government into taking it by force.


People have the hardest time understanding these two things. If there is something in life that you either want or need, the US government shouldn't be there to play the roll of mommy state and provide it for you.

The opportunities available to people in this country are limitless, the only condition is that you have work for these things. Although the concept of self reliance is vanishing and the idea that the government should be there to provide everything for you is becoming common place. If you need/want something, go earn it.

People have the hardest time understanding these two things. If there is something in life that you either want or need, the US government shouldn't be there to play the roll of mommy state and provide it for you.

The opportunities available to people in this country are limitless, the only condition is that you have work for these things. Although the concept of self reliance is vanishing and the idea that the government should be there to provide everything for you is becoming common place. If you need/want something, go earn it.
What about the people who aren't able to earn an income?
Or people who are mentally disabled?
retired pensioners?
opportunities depends on your situation of your parents, if they're rich you're set if they're not, you're opportunities quickly vanish.

One day, I'm going to try and understand this mentality. To me (as someone who hasn't grown up in the USA) it's completely bizarre.

You're English right?
No you're not. You're not even British. You're a European.
(I hope you see what I'm getting at?)

I may be an American, but I'm also a New Englander, and more specifically, a Connecticut resident. The whole checks & balances system of the Constitution is what makes the United STATES the United STATES and not the United URBANITES of America. :)

What about the people who aren't able to earn an income?
Or people who are mentally disabled?
retired pensioners?
opportunities depends on your situation of your parents, if they're rich you're set if they're not, you're opportunities quickly vanish.

That's what charities and government programs are for. But to say that the country is going to feed 300 people 3 squares ever day? No.

Alright, here are some of the amendments that I would propose to the United States Constitution

a) The United States Government would be obligated to maintain a balanced budget over the longer term, and would only be permitted to keep debt at a level not greater than 40% of GDP. Amendments to spending bills would only be allowed to be within the scope of the original bill (i.e. pork barrel spending would not be attached to military bills)

b) The House of Representatives would be elected using a proportional based electoral system. The status quo would remain for the Senate.

c) Presidental elections would be required to occur on the first Saturday of November every fourth year, with all other elections also required to occur on a Saturday

d) Non US born people would be permitted to run for President, provided that they have been American citizens for a period of at least twenty-five years.

a) I like the second half of the statement. As for the first half, it could be workable if there are provisions for how long a term and what happens if it cannot be achieved.

b) The House is already proportional. Connecticut (as an example) used to have 6 Reps (since 1933), but we've been down to 5 since 1993. At this point, each Representative is for roughly 693,000 citizens. If you mean that it would be raw population voting, how could that possibly work? You'd have no representation from huge swaths of the country!

c) That's a very good idea.

d) That I still do not like. Too easy for foreign interests to weigh on the guy in charge. Maybe Arnie doesn't consider himself Austrian anymore, but he'd still have a bit of a soft spot if there was a dispute. But others may be more... expat.

What about the people who aren't able to earn an income?
Or people who are mentally disabled?
retired pensioners?
opportunities depends on your situation of your parents, if they're rich you're set if they're not, you're opportunities quickly vanish.

Private charitable orgnization are the place where people who are unable to earn a living shoud seek aid. Not from tax payers who should be under no obligation to see after the welfare of others.

If the government weren't raping and pillaging my check every week perhaps I'd be more inclined to philanthropy.

And the last line is complete and total dog squeeze. Opportunites may be more abundent for wealthy individuals, but on the other hands the wealthy parents created these said opportunites by doing well for themselves and planning not only for their future but also for the future of their children. And don't bother strolling down inhertitence road, b/c less than %1 percet of wealth individuals aquire their wealth in this fashion.

I've got a better idea: Imma rewrite the entire Constitution. Be back in a few days with the PDF.

A'ight c u then.

Amendment I: No Jews

You're English right?
No you're not. You're not even British. You're a European.
(I hope you see what I'm getting at?)

I may be an American, but I'm also a New Englander, and more specifically, a Connecticut resident. The whole checks & balances system of the Constitution is what makes the United STATES the United STATES and not the United URBANITES of America. :)
This is exactly what I meant. To me, the idea that one should have one's vote diluted purely for living in an urban area is quite strange. Is there some stigma associated with living in a city in the USA? I simply don't see how this elaborate system makes the USA any better off by augmenting the voting power of smaller states at the expense of larger states with big cities.

Amendment I: No Jews

No Homers

Okay, two.

Amendment XXVIII: No excuses, play like a champion.

Amendment XXXIV: There is porn of it. No exceptions.

This is exactly what I meant. To me, the idea that one should have one's vote diluted purely for living in an urban area is quite strange. Is there some stigma associated with living in a city in the USA? I simply don't see how this elaborate system makes the USA any better off by augmenting the voting power of smaller states at the expense of larger states with big cities.

It offers a much better balance between the majority and the minority-it is much harder for the majority of people (living in urban areas) to set policy for the entire country, most of which is rural.

It offers a much better balance between the majority and the minority-it is much harder for the majority of people (living in urban areas) to set policy for the entire country, most of which is rural.

Isn't that why we have a house of representatives?

Isn't that why we have a house of representatives?

I think you mean that is why we have a Senate. HoR is based on population. The Electoral College (and the Senate) is so that the states don't get screwed over by who is running the country or congress through downright popular vote. That's just a small reason why the Continental Congress took so long; nailing down compromise so the big and small states got along...until the civil war...

we apparently need an amendment that says

"hey, you know that 9th amendment, about how the enumeration of certain rights doesn't mean there aren't others? seriously, we mean it. really."

Amendment I - Religion shall not be taught nor represented in any official form in any state education facility

Amendment II - No individual or organisation shall spend more than $500,000 in any complete electoral campaign.

Amendment III - All citizens have the right to healthcare, shelter and the minimum means to ensure a dignified daily life without recourse to begging, vagrancy or any illegal activity.

Amendment IV - No citizen except one empowered as such by the state has there right to bear any firearm.

Amendment V - No citizen may intentionally take the life of another to protect material goods.

Amendment VI - All citizens have the right to a fair trial, including the option of having their trial conducted in a neutral country under US law.

Amendment VII - The government may hold no person without trial.

Amendment VIII - All land holdings of more than $500,000,000 value, 150 sq. miles of fertile land or 1000 sq. miles of barren land are to remain the property of the state for all time.

Amendment IX - All water courses and permanent rights of way are to remain the property of the state for all time.

Amendment X - All agricultural estates, mineral concessions or industrial concerns individually yielding more than 7.5% of total national output of any one commodity shall remain the property of the state for all time.

Your amendments blow. I mean they really blow. They really, really blow. They really, really, really fucking blow.

The Bill of Rights

by Comrade Dan

1) The freedom to Rock...to rock hard!

2) The right to arm bears

3) The right to have more than three women quartered in a private residence

4) The right to kick down doors and stuff...legally

5) The right to fight for your right to party

6) Accused persons have the right to...Well, they don't have rights

7) The right to own a monkey

8) Fines will not exceed the worth of the offenders child

9) Whatever else...is cool

10) Power and authority will rest solely with the few

The Bill of Rights

by Comrade Dan

1) The freedom to Rock...to rock hard!

2) The right to arm bears

3) The right to have more than three women quartered in a private residence

4) The right to kick down doors and stuff...legally

5) The right to fight for your right to party

6) Accused persons have the right to...Well, they don't have rights

7) The right to own a monkey

8) Fines will not exceed the worth of the offenders child

9) Whatever else...is cool

10) Power and authority will rest solely with the few

I accuse you of kicking down my door. There, no rights for you now because you're accused.

This is exactly what I meant. To me, the idea that one should have one's vote diluted purely for living in an urban area is quite strange. Is there some stigma associated with living in a city in the USA? I simply don't see how this elaborate system makes the USA any better off by augmenting the voting power of smaller states at the expense of larger states with big cities.

Diluted? Not much:
Wyoming: 1 in 438 (no Senatorial Electors) = 0.22% of the Presidential vote
California: 53 in 438 (no Senatorial Electors) = 12.10% of the Presidential vote
vs.
Wyoming: 3 in 538 (w/ Senatorial Electors) = 0.55% of the Presidential vote
California: 55 in 538 (w/ Senatorial Electors) = 10.22% of the Presidential vote

...and it's not an augmentation, it is a cumulative of the state's Congressmen/women. For example, my state, Connecticut gets 7 vote: 5 for the Reps and 2 for the Senators.

Stigma for living in cities? No, not at all. But the whole reason for joining the Union is that all states are equals, and that representation is 2 per state in the Senate and by population in the House of Representatives, so the country isn't run by the large population states.
Without the electoral college, 26 or so cities would run the country, and 95% of the country would therefore be disenfranchised.

If you're really interested, check out this thread, you can see my full arguement there: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=552560

I think you mean that is why we have a Senate.

No I did not. You stated:

It offers a much better balance between the majority and the minority-it is much harder for the majority of people

The house of representatives, a proportionate system, is designed to deal with concerns of majority and minority. The senate, being a two seat per state regardless of population system, is not in the least bit affected by population, and in fact creates an extreme disproportionate imbalance favority small population states.

The House, as I said, being a proportionate system, is designed to address concerns of balance.

No I did not. You stated:



The house of representatives, a proportionate system, is designed to deal with concerns of majority and minority. The senate, being a two seat per state regardless of population system, is not in the least bit affected by population, and in fact creates an extreme disproportionate imbalance favority small population states.

The House, as I said, being a proportionate system, is designed to address concerns of balance.

The House of Representatives is designed to give larger populations a little bit more clout congress; it is not concerned with matters of majority and minority. If it was concerned with 'balance', it would be even. Which leads us to (wait for it) why the senate has two senators for EACH state.

The House, being a proportionate and uneven system to begin with, is NOT designed to address concerns of balance regarding population. It was added to keep the big states from walking out on the Continental Congress. What do you fail to understand?