If you could cancel a part of the constitution what article/amendment would it be?

I voted "one of the amendments" because I believe that the 17th Amendment (Senators elected by statewide popular vote) should be done away with.

I also don't think that voting should be a right. Besides 18 being too young of an age imo, I more importantly believe that anyone who is receiving government assistance of any kind should not be able to vote, as that forms a conflict of interest.

 

Very well said. I'm sad to hear about your son, and about the struggles you are going through. This would never have happened in Europe, but is happening in the USA, and some people still have the nerve to say that we're a welfare state (we are not), and they generalize that all welfare seekers are lazy moochers and parasites, which is entirely false.

Also, I'm pretty sure that the moment that a true disability happened in their own family, these people who stereotype disability as laziness would rapidly change their minds and would eagerly apply for assistance. It's often the people lucky enough to have no disabled persons among themselves and their loved ones, who stereotype like this.

 

Bolded as this applies in a variety of ways.

When did Dick Cheney, and millions of others, suddenly become tolerant of gay people?

Judge~y soccer mom suddenly discovers that not all teen drinkers come from loser parents.

Etc. Etc.

 

The 2nd A which was outdated when it was written. The Electoral College needs work but actually has some advantages.

I'd include rights to healthcare and housing in the Bill

 

17th Amendment - go back to the Senate represents the State governments as a non-political deliberative body.

 

Which would do what? The militia is all able bodied persons, regulated meaning they have weapons in good order and know how to use them.

 

It that why we have never had a black President or Vice-President?

 

I'm straining -- trying so hard to remember the last time I heard an Asian-American complain that he was "oppressed" and "abused" by "racist white supremacists".

But, from what I've observed all my long life, "Oriental" people usually spend a LOT more time becoming educated, working hard, and skillfully in order to be successful, than they do in bitching all the time about how badly they're treated (like some others, often while committing crimes, or cashing welfare checks)....

 

The one that ended Prohibition... The Roaring 20's were the best!

 

Try hard to remember the last-time racist white supremacists imported asian-americans as SLAVES and kept them in CHAINS for CENTURIES here in America, Cy.

You are comparing papayas to cumquats and ending up with illogical extremist rightwing DISINFORMATION fruit salad again.

Sad!

 

We disagree on the term well regulated then.

 

Although Chinese crime bosses in China did kidnap and sell quite a number of poor Chinese peasants as slaves of their 'tong' operatives on the U. S. West Coast (in much the same way that Black chieftains sold conquered Blacks as slaves after African tribal conflicts), the Negro slaves were treated better. Why?

If a Chinese laborer failed to work hard, or got sick, or became too injured to be useful, he was simply thrown aside to starve and die. But, because they had been purchased, and were thus valuable property -- an asset -- the Negro slave was provided shelter, food, clothing, a modicum of medical care, and, encouraged to breed!

The conditions of both those Chinese laborers and the Negro slaves was loathsome, detestable, and INHUMAN. Fortunately, Negro slavery ended in the United States 156 years ago, but the far less 'visible' specter of Chinese being gang-pressed into labor camps didn't really end here until about 50 years later.

At any rate, as I've pointed out to you again and again, in 1964 and in 1965, we in the United States adopted the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, respectively! This all-important, necessary action was taken to make persons of ALL races completely EQUAL BEFORE THE LAW, Te, and that was a truly wonderful, liberating reality that all of us should be proud of.

My 'fruit salad' is a delicious dish, composed of ALL American citizens, from all backgrounds, of all races, mixed in together. Are you sure you don't want some, too...?

 

Words have meanings in at the time and in the constitution it meant "in good working order" not government control. The "militia" is every abled bodied person. The SCOTUS has long maintained that.

 

Complete and utter NONSENSE!

The Militia Acts ESTABLISH beyond any doubt EXACTLY what the Founding Fathers INTENDED by the term "WELL REGULATED".

 

False as to the 2nd Amendment none of the several militia acts vacated the 2nd Amendment as the SCOTUS has stated on several occasions.

Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (200, was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that ...


Like a "well regulated clock", one in good working order.

And I get it you want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment.............I don't.

 

Scalia STIPULATED that 2A can be REGULATED in Heller.

Strike TWO against 2A.

Sad!

 

Which refutes nothing I said................

 

We AGREE that you said NOTHING!

 

Me>> Which refutes nothing I said................

Do I need to diagram the sentence for you?