The JBS'ers say they revere the Constitution. Well, that's exactly what an Article V *AMENDMENT* convention in fact is - using it *IS* revering the Constitutionh. Nothing more.
I don’t understand Freepers’ seeming general attraction to a concon.
1. It’s never been convincingly demonstrated that they can’t put EVERYTHING on the table. Given the general depravity of the American people nowadays, having elected the Obamanation twice, I have little confidence that freedom of religion or the 2A would survive such a process.
2. The PTB are ALREADY ignoring the constitution and we’re doing nothing about it. So we want to write some more amendments for them to ignore?
So, those who respect the constitution have EVERYTHING to lose in a concon, but slime like the Obamanation have NOTHING to lose in a concon. Conservative support for a concon is therefore illogical, as far as I can tell.
The JBS'ers say they revere the Constitution. Well, that's exactly what an Article V *AMENDMENT* convention in fact is - using it *IS* revering the Constitutionh. Nothing more.
It’s a pipe dream. People don’t believe in pipe dreams for rational reasons, they just believe in them because they emotionally need something to believe in. Facing reality is too much for those types.
It’s not a “concon” and the fact that you use that term reveals you are part of the disinformation smear or a consumer of it.
Your other concerns are addressed here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdZuV8JnvvA
Concon alarmism is afoot as usual.
This is a convention to PROPOSE amendments. 75% of the state’s legislatures would have to approve... if a convention can even put a consensus together in the first place.
Using the term “concon” harms your credibility.
Rather than criticize something you obviously haven't researched, take the time to view Levin's video link in
post #14.