- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: Is It Time For The States To Call For A Constitutional Convention?
Posted on 6/11/19 at 3:22 pm to Themole
Posted on 6/11/19 at 3:22 pm to Themole
quote:
Are you referring to the separation of church AND state? If so, that language is not even in the Constitution.
Nor is "freedom from religion" as he alluded to.
I'm well aware that the term "Separation of Church and State" is not part of the constitution, but try telling that to a liberal justice. How many decisions have been made using that phase by liberal Supreme Court justices to advance a secular America and taking away people's right to worship?
1
Posted on 6/11/19 at 4:18 pm to scrooster
quote:
It could backfire.
Yeah. It could very well be a disaster. Today's left openly opposes free speech. Nasty women, all of them.
But the first chance they get they'll try to pack the SCOTUS and that's the end of the Republic. I don't see how to stop them short of a Constitutional Convention or a war. Maybe Trump could attempt to pack it himself and force them to oppose him with a constitutional amendment?
Posted on 6/11/19 at 6:46 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Second, you do realize the people responsible for forming our government had very different ideas as to the role of the federal government, right?
The problem that many overlook is that during the initial writing of the Constitution, everyone saw themselves as a state citizen first and foremost. That doesn't exist by the majority of Americans today. Most people have grown up thinking of themselves as Americans first (ironic huh) over Louisianans, Yorkies, Floridians, etc.
Also ideologies have shifted greatly. It's not just Civil Rights, its attitudes about many cultural factors that have changed greatly. Post industrial societies obviously have different expectations and concerns than ones more agriculturally and puritanical in nature.
A constitutional convention would probably create more liberal policies than conservative ones. Or we get certain conservative policies strengthen but have stronger liberal influence in other areas.
Posted on 6/11/19 at 6:49 pm to CU_Tigers4life
Everyone is frightened by the unknown and uncontrollable outcomes that could occur and rightfully so.
Posted on 6/11/19 at 7:04 pm to CU_Tigers4life
quote:
I'm well aware that the term "Separation of Church and State" is not part of the constitution, but try telling that to a liberal justice. How many decisions have been made using that phase by liberal Supreme Court justices to advance a secular America and taking away people's right to worship?
I'll admit that I'm not well read with respect to people being banned from worshipping their God of choice. That's on me to look into.
I will say that the concept of have a secular government has never been an original thought by progressives. It actually has its roots in classical liberalism.
Free exercise does not inherently mean you have to elevate one religion over another.
Establishment Clause
quote:
United States law, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, together with that Amendment's Free Exercise Clause, form the constitutional right of freedom of religion. The relevant constitutional text is: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".
The Establishment Clause was based on a number of precedents, including the Constitutions of Clarendon, the Bill of Rights 1689, and the Pennsylvania and New Jersey colonial constitutions. An initial draft by John Dickinson was prepared in conjunction with his drafting the Articles of Confederation. In 1789, then-congressman James Madison prepared another draft which, following discussion and debate in the First Congress, would become part of the text of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. The second half of the Establishment Clause includes the Free Exercise Clause, which allows individual citizens freedom from governmental interference in both private and public religious affairs.
The Establishment Clause is a limitation placed upon the United States Congress preventing it from passing legislation forcing an establishment of religion. The second half of the Establishment Clause inherently prohibits the government from preventing the free exercise of religion.
Posted on 6/11/19 at 7:08 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
with amending the Constitution
quote:
what do you suggest?
Complete overhaul of the 14th Amendment.
End citizenship by soil unless, at least one parent is a citizen.
Disallow dual citizenship
Repeal of the 17th Amendment
Term Limits. House members 5 terms total 10 years
Senators Max 3 Terms 18 years.
Amendment that prevents former Senators or Congressmen from being lobbyists for 10 years once out of office.
Voting age raised to 21.
Deny Amnesty Claims for immigration except from border countries and/or proven political/religious claims.
End chain migration except for spouse and children.
Posted on 6/11/19 at 7:17 pm to Wtodd
quote:Response to emotional analysis from others with an emotional outburst.
A good place to start is to leave it the frick alone and start reading it by it's words and not by someone's fricking feels.
Fails to recognize the irony.
Posted on 6/11/19 at 7:19 pm to AggieHank86
Yes. TD is just like constitutional review lol.
Posted on 6/11/19 at 7:22 pm to volod
This would be a disaster in the making. Right now if you go by the wording of the original Bill of Rights it includes rights given to us at birth. Bringing a convention back now with the current PC culture we would no longer have those inalienable rights and would be granted certain liberties by whichever party is in control. I do not wish to have someone determine what rights I should or should not have. Even though now those rights are determined by the better lawyer arguing for them.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News