- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

What would the Constitution Look Like if the Founding Fathers could see 2022?
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:19 am
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:19 am
We would probably have 50 amendments at least worded in a very clear cut way...
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:26 am to CU_Tigers4life
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/21/23 at 1:12 pm
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:27 am to CU_Tigers4life
I think it would look exactly the same. May have one extra provision about politicians intentionally breaking them to be tried for treason.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:28 am to CU_Tigers4life
quote:
We would probably have 50 amendments at least worded in a very clear cut way...
If they could see this far out, they likely would've incorporated the BoR into the original as Articles.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:29 am to CU_Tigers4life
Term limits, age limits, and clauses that companies that due x amount of business or get y amount of subsidies/tax credits from the government are considered government entities with regards to individual rights.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:30 am to CU_Tigers4life
They would have included a peaceful secession process.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:31 am to CU_Tigers4life
They would be assembling armies again.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:32 am to CU_Tigers4life
They would have put something in there making sure women never got the right to vote.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:34 am to OysterPoBoy
quote:
They would have put something in there making sure women never got the right to vote.
How? Anything of that nature could still be amended.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:34 am to CU_Tigers4life
They would be totally stunned at the out of control unchecked expansion of the executive branch and the unelected divisions in it. They would add substantial checks on the executive.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:35 am to OysterPoBoy
quote:
They would have put something in there making sure women never got the right to vote.
Well, I often argue this is where things started turning to crap in this country...
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:39 am to CU_Tigers4life
The 2A would look a lot different. You can't for a minute think they would look at all the mass shootings and not write it differently.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:41 am to CU_Tigers4life
Women still couldn't vote for the win.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:41 am to mmcgrath
yes, they would have struck 'well regulated'
to avoid confusion.
to avoid confusion.
This post was edited on 6/7/22 at 11:23 am
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:44 am to swolverine
quote:
Term and age limits would have been included.
Yep, it pisses me off every time I have to listen to Biden, Pelosi and Schumer on their high horses. Wtf have they done in their 40 years sucking off the tit of the American taxpayer to fix anything? And why am I supposed to believe now that 2 of them are senile that they’re capable of doing it now? Insane.
Say what you want about his style, but Trump did more in his 4 years in office to strengthen this country than the 3 of them have done in ~120 years of combined “service” to our country. And in 2 years they’ve already walked back the progress to worse than pre-Trump. Yet people believe in them and fall for the stupidity at their own peril.
Yeah, let’s destroy free speech, the right to bear arms… now what will they do when the person in the White House isn’t to their liking? They’ll be begging for their free speech. But it’ll be too late.
Of course perhaps they’ll never face that since their party seems to have mastered election fraud with impunity due to its complicit Ministry of Propaganda (I.e., US “mainstream” media). Bunch of traitors.
This post was edited on 6/7/22 at 7:46 am
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:47 am to mmcgrath
quote:
The 2A would look a lot different. You can't for a minute think they would look at all the mass shootings and not write it differently.
They weren't as dumb as marxist democrats. They knew that freedom often means less security.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:48 am to CU_Tigers4life
I guarantee you that abortion would be outlawed and babies would be considered individuals.
Also, homosexual marriage would be banned as well as men in women's sports.
They probably would also have the capital move to different regions every few years to bust up the collected power, and limit the number of employees the federal government could have.
They would also put in a clause that you can not change how Senators are elected. That it and the electoral college are not amendable.
Also, homosexual marriage would be banned as well as men in women's sports.
They probably would also have the capital move to different regions every few years to bust up the collected power, and limit the number of employees the federal government could have.
They would also put in a clause that you can not change how Senators are elected. That it and the electoral college are not amendable.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:52 am to CU_Tigers4life
Term limits is the only addition but the 14th or more over its application pretty much took a sledge hammer to what the FFs established.
This post was edited on 6/7/22 at 7:56 am
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:53 am to TrueTiger
quote:
They would have included a peaceful secession process.
This is very important. If a state could peacefully leave the union, Alaska wouldn't be jacked around about drilling their oil. Also, the farm states wouldn't be threatened with losing representation via electoral college or various other crap that is forced on them by the communist utopias.
Finally, we would probably be a much larger nation if countries knew they could leave (albeit it should be difficult) if they get screwed.
And final finally, this would limit the size and power of the federal government as a side affect.
Posted on 6/7/22 at 7:56 am to TrueTiger
quote:
yes, they would has struck 'well regulated'
to avoid confusion.
And include government - either state or federal - will provide weapons - in addition to any citizens may acquire on their own - along with weapons safety and use training. "Free" range time and ammo is an entitlement I could get behind.
This post was edited on 6/7/22 at 8:00 am
Popular
Back to top

31








