Comment: Constitutional gov=implied right to create/amend a Constitution.

(See in situ)


Constitutional gov=implied right to create/amend a Constitution.

My guess was based on you saying something like "It's simple really". I can't remember. So, I thought, "How would a child look at this?"

1) Before you can exercise any "Constitutional" rights (not exclusively referring to "natural" rights, but rights granted and/or recognized as inherent or by contract), you would first have to have a "Constitution". Right? (I could tell the OP wasn't asking about "natural rights".)

2) Assuming you have a "Constitution", "Declaration", or "other such Articles" means you exercised some right inherent or implied to "establish and ordain" it. In short, you had that right to begin with.

3) If you "established and ordained" a document stating what rights you retain that .gov shall not infringe or abridge w/o warrant supported by affidavit and signed by a judge, and what few and limited powers you grant to .gov to exercise on your behalf, then does it not imply that you had to exercise this right "first" in order to spell out what others you retain? (ref. Bill of Rights for those retained, among others.)

It really is that simple, and I was honestly taking a stab into the wind expecting to get cut down snidely by my intellectual superiors. And in fact I remember one such cut down when I learned the hard way what "cognitive distortions" is. Discussions like these are important to the preservation of freedom and liberty, more important than egos, and I don't know what preparatory amendment means, but want to learn. I don't believe this thread deserves down votes. All who down voted may have adhered too rigidly to their own beliefs, instead of just looking at the basic question Chris asked, within the context and parameters he set.

In closing, regarding Article V, I'm not afraid of it. I'm only concerned about the fornicating pieces of bovine fecal matter (crap! C.D. score climbing...) that would invariably be elected, or selected by the legislatures, to attend such a convention. I'm glad we have Article V. I just don't think we can use it in this climate w/o irreparable harm, but I'm open to understanding arguments counter to my position. If someone can make a better case than JBS "Beware Article V", I'll gladly check it out. Concern about the mindset of others does not equal fear.

Kelldor

P.S. I humbly remind folks to pls scroll up and re-read the very top sentence on the page. Thx. It's directly related to this thread. The one we have is not perfect but it's the best out there. "Restoring Constitutional Government to the United States of America" might someday after a collapse mean having to draft a new one for your new country if this one goes the way of the USSR. I hope we have a bunch of Chris Browns as delegates to that convention, or an Article V.