If you could rewrite the Constitution, what would you change?

If a man fathers a child, he should pay child support. This is just his basic responsibility and not something the woman is imposing on him.
If she has access to abortion, but chooses not to avail herself, she is imposing.

It's not a child until it's born - the woman is saying

"I want this thing - you pay for half of it."
 
The legislate from the bench crowd has gone to the source and controls all of the top law schools. So I don't think that the approach that you were talking about is going to resolve the issue.
Why wouldn't it? The SCOTUS currently has a 6-3 conservative majority, and 8 of the 9 all went to Harvard or Yale (Barrett went to Notre Dame). If anything, this proposal would lessen the number of SCOTUS justices from the Ivy League schools. There are many judges in the federal judiciary who didn't go to the Ivy League, but there's an Ivy League bias when Presidents nominate them to the SCOTUS. By taking the SCOTUS appointments out of the direct control of the President and Senate, it increases the likelihood that non Ivy League judges will rise to the top.
 
Why wouldn't it? The SCOTUS currently has a 6-3 conservative majority, and 8 of the 9 all went to Harvard or Yale (Barrett went to Notre Dame). If anything, this proposal would lessen the number of SCOTUS justices from the Ivy League schools. There are many judges in the federal judiciary who didn't go to the Ivy League, but there's an Ivy League bias when Presidents nominate them to the SCOTUS. By taking the SCOTUS appointments out of the direct control of the President and Senate, it increases the likelihood that non Ivy League judges will rise to the top.
There are relatively few law schools like Pepperdine that don't have the same bias is the Ivy League's. Leftists are religious zealots. They find points of control and like a virus they occupy these points, because that's what they're all about. They have no other identity but controlling you and me and anyone else who is not similarly minded. I just think this would be a long experiment in belatedly realizing how widely these people are distributed through points of control in multiple institutions. i'm not suggesting that they were majority. In fact I'm quite certain that they are the small minority that we suspect that they are. But when it comes to these points of control that they live to occupy they are the overwhelming majority.
 
To answer the OP, I'd have congressional term limits.

More restricting voters choices?

The "how to change the constitution" process is perfectly fine. It should be easy enough that it can be done if there's a groundswell of support across the country (which it is), but it should be hard enough so that you just can't change it on a whim (which it is). It's an outrage that we can 'effectively' change the constitution by work-around (i.e., court rulings) if we find it too hard to change by amendment.
 
Most states attract businesses by giving them special treatment
Really? Do you have examples of a state that gave any business the privileges Florida gave Disney?
It would be one thing if FL decided that Disney should not have had that tax break and took it away, but that is not what happened. DeSantis took this away because Disney criticized his policies. This was clearly retribution.
You still haven't demonstrated that Disney was entitled to this special treatment, nor explained why you're taking this hypocritical stance.
As for Dobbs, we women do see this as onerous and removal of our autonomy.
If a woman believes this, then she's an idiot.
Women in half the country now have limited access to abortion.
"Limited"? So, they do have at least some access.

Isn't it interesting that you insist people's right to keep and bear arms should be limited, but then complain that the alleged right to kill your baby is "limited".

Once again, you demonstrate yourself to be a hypocrite.
And the claim that the choice is made by the states is false. These new restrictions are not made by the citizens of those states, they are made by gerrymandered legislatures in states where the women were not asked.
Thank you for demonstrating that you don't understand how a federal republic works.
I think that businesses should pay taxes to the same extent as regular people. However, I do think that regulations have gotten out of hand, and many could easily be eliminated. I am sure that you and I would disagree on which ones should go.
I don't believe you do, as you are constantly railing against big business, stating they should be more heavily regulated and taxed.
 
I certainly think the 2nd amendment is due for an overhaul, and that the 1st amendment could be more explicit.

The duties of SCOTUS could be clearer and should be time limited.

Comments?
I would mention God and Jesus in it just to watch you peeps explode in rage.
 
It is conservatives that tend to use the courts to get unpopular provisions passed. Gore v Bush. Citizens United. Dobbs. They allowed gerrymandering to continue.
You mean Roe...but you get confused. I've seen that.

I still do not believe that book collections for kindergarteners contain porn, and have yet to see any surveys or studies that provide data on this. What comes across is that some people want to remove books that treat homosexuals as people instead of perverts.
Of course you don't...for lack of skill you are unable to do any research.

...and the fact that library workers saw it, read the books and saw the pics...and quoted some verbatim here...will not change your staunch faith. You are a devotee, and you are enthralled.
So you think it is OK to cancel companies that are "woke", IOW that hold progressive opinions?
No...but I think it's fine to leave their jeans on the shelf, and buy jeans that are not made by slaves in China.
When it comes to abortion, I should not get to judge for anyone but myself. And you should not get to make decisions for me or for any other woman.
You know this is a silly statement, right? I'm allowed to talk about survival. I'm glad you survived...I'm in favor of your offspring doing likewise.

I don't believe you have the right to forbid me to say those words anywhere I like. Do you know how little it occurs to you that you are a survivor? Sometimes we take survival for granted, as if your mom did not lay her life down for you...and it was worth it.

And what do you mean with your reference to a forced ban on school prayer? Are you seriously advocating that we go back to a time when students were expected to participate in prayer at the beginning of each school day? What sort of prayer would be acceptable to a diverse student body?
This is a silly statement. Students were asked to acknowledge their dependence on God, and to pray for blessing on them their parents their teachers and their schools...That was forbidden, and you suggest that congress (and the courts) shall make laws concerning the free practice of religion. (Shredding the constitution...)

I suggest that folks who want to pray should be allowed to pray wherever they feel like praying, if it's not rudely interrupting the normal process of a day. In school or otherwise. I'm not a Neanderthal like those who would silence their neighbors using any means possible.
 
More restricting voters choices?
We have a pretty long track record of the American people accepting presidential term limits. The only reason that we didn't get congressional term limits in connection with The Contract with America was that Dick Armey torpedoed it. Every other item in the contract with America was voted through the House of Representatives. So the question becomes would most Republicans sacrifice Mitch McConnell to get rid of Chuck Schumer.

I think most Republicans will take that deal in a heartbeat. Most Republicans fondest dream would be to get rid of Mitch McConnell. We have really the opposite problem. We can't get rid of entrenched party leaders so their need to respond to voters has dropped to something approximeeting zero. In fact Mitch McConnell said the other day that Republicans are all for the war in Ukraine. May be Republican donors, but I'll tell you the Republican voters don't want American involvement in the war in Ukraine.
 
Control freaks to the left of me, control freaks to the right....
What your pithy statement here fails to acknowledge is that there are control freaks involved and they throw all their lovers before the American voters ever have a chance to be polled at the voting booth. Whatever we can do to level the playing field to mitigate their power increases the power of voters.

Term limits is one of the very very few mechanisms that could come to the assistance of the American people in the circumstances in which we find ourselves. I love your statement and if the parties were in any way equally matched that is the people who are controlling the elections and the people who are voting in the elections it would be quite Germain. But that's fantasy land we're nowhere close to that set of circumstances.
 
Back
Top