-1 vote

Constitutional amendments

With all the talk of gun legislation, gay marriage, and numerous other proposals that clearly go against the constitution. Why are we, as liberty oriented individuals, not using the argument that the only way certain measures can be put into law is through a constitutional amendment? Do our positions think these processes set forth are too burdensome and want to get away with an easier method? (Rhetorical) We should frame the argument that certain proposals need to be sent through the amendment process in order to be enacted. They are winning this debate in the sense that there is an actual debate on a given topic and bypassing the amendment process. Thoughts?



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

For the record, I did not

For the record, I did not vote up or down on this post. But, I will say this, how can we expect people who haven't read or don't understand, or just don't give a damn about the Constitution to amend it? Would you really want these criminals messing around with such an important document?

We don't want them messing

We don't want them messing around with the constitution. My point was to frame the debate to where these items are not debateable. Apparently I didn't say that well enough.