Skip to comments.
10 New Proposed Constitutional Amendments - The Bill of Federalism
Patriot Room ^
| May 14, 2009
| Bill Dupray
Posted on 05/14/2009 2:28:24 PM PDT by Bill Dupray
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
To: Bill Dupray
2
posted on
05/14/2009 2:30:34 PM PDT
by
4Speed
To: Bill Dupray
Instead of adding Amendments we should be repealing some. The 17th and the 13th should be the first to go.
3
posted on
05/14/2009 2:30:49 PM PDT
by
Lurker
(The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
To: Bill Dupray
My bad. It should be the 16th and the 17th. Sorry.
4
posted on
05/14/2009 2:32:25 PM PDT
by
Lurker
(The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
To: Bill Dupray
That should just about cover it!
5
posted on
05/14/2009 2:33:08 PM PDT
by
ataDude
(Its like 1933, mixed with the Carter 70s, plus the books 1984 and Animal Farm, all at the same time.)
To: Bill Dupray
Wow, how do we get that going?
6
posted on
05/14/2009 2:34:00 PM PDT
by
Jewbacca
(Yes, I am very hairy and good with small arms.)
To: Lurker
It should be the 16th and the 17thYep. Let's make it "Federal" again, instead of "National". Some here might not know the difference, but many will.
7
posted on
05/14/2009 2:35:05 PM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
To: Lurker
It would be easier to take them out if we take out the 19th first.
8
posted on
05/14/2009 2:35:14 PM PDT
by
Dr. Sivana
(There is no salvation in politics.)
To: Dr. Sivana
To: Lurker
Instead of adding Amendments we should be repealing some. The 17th and the 13th should be the first to go. The 13th Amendment prohibits slavery. You want it repealed????
To: Dr. Sivana
It would be easier to take them out if we take out the 19th first. LOL!!! But that would never happen.
To: Lurker
Some would argue that the 16th did repeal the 13th.
12
posted on
05/14/2009 2:42:34 PM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(No free man bows to a foreign king.)
To: Bill Dupray
Article [of Amendment 5] [Freedom of Political Speech and Press] The freedom of speech and press includes any contribution to political campaigns or to candidates for public office; and shall be construed to extend equally to any medium of communication however scarce. . . . I disagree. No entity(any kind of business) that does not have an actual right to vote should NOT be allowed to donate to any public servant. It's clearly corruption. AND no person should be allowed to donate to any elected official outside of their state, the POTUS excluded.
13
posted on
05/14/2009 2:49:06 PM PDT
by
SwankyC
(Please stand by - The Patriot Act can and will be used against all of you right wing extremists.)
To: Bill Dupray
None of these would be needed if we would just start abiding by the Constitution as the framers intended.
To: Bill Dupray; All
Article [of Amendment 11] [Transfer of wealth to foreign nations]
The Government shall not tax its citizens and transfer that treasure to foreign governments. There shall be no case where citizens shall fund foreign governments, armies, citizens, special causes, political causes or welfare funding.
15
posted on
05/14/2009 2:57:24 PM PDT
by
edcoil
(Taxes only help an evil government)
To: HapaxLegamenon
The 13th Amendment prohibits slavery. You want it repealed???? If I'm going to have to pay reparations then damnit I want some slaves out of the deal.
16
posted on
05/14/2009 2:58:39 PM PDT
by
OpeEdMunkey
(We seem to have reached a critical mass of stupid people.)
To: Bill Dupray
It is nonsense - like saying we need a new 2nd Amendment. Ho will we phrase it, “...AND WE REALLY MEAN IT THIS TIME!” ??
You are being distracted by garbage like this, while the fed turns us into Zimbabwe by printing money like the ink supply will never run out.
17
posted on
05/14/2009 2:58:42 PM PDT
by
patton
(Oligarchy is an absorbing state in the Markov process we find ourselves in. Sigh.)
To: Lurker; ml/nj; firebrand; rmlew; pabianice; Red Steel; David; holdonnow; GreatOne; ...
Instead of adding Amendments, we should be repealing some.The notion that perhaps a couple of Amendments should be repealed has no bearing on whether others should be added.
Over the past 100 years or so, the power and scope of the federal government have expanded by leaps and bounds, while no constitutional amendments have been adopted which are specifically aimed at reining in federal government growth (except perhaps the 21st - repeal of prohibition). Prof. Barnett deserves congratulations for proposing such amendments, which at the very least could start people thinking in the direction of constitutional changes to save liberty and repel centralized government tyranny.
To: Bill Dupray
WONDERFUL.
AMEN!
However, imho, need one protecting free exercise of the JUDEO/CHRISTIAN FAITHS, ETHIC etc. and proscribing certain others—at least certain aspects of others . . . e.g. Jihad.
19
posted on
05/14/2009 3:05:48 PM PDT
by
Quix
(POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
To: Bill Dupray
Shouldn’t these be Anti-Federalist Amendments?
20
posted on
05/14/2009 3:37:35 PM PDT
by
OneWingedShark
(Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson