• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Calls For A Constitutional Convention?

Invayne

Invayne

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
817
Reaction score
122
Location
Present
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Has anybody heard about this?

This is very dangerous for our country, especially with the congress that we have today. They can stick ANY amendment in there that they want, and we have NO say over the matter. Yesterday I received an email saying they were only 2 states away from the 34 they need to hold one...Ohio and one more. It looks like Ohio caved.
Laws, Acts, and Legislation
They want to hold a convention for a balanced budget amendment. What alot of people don't realize is they DON'T HAVE TO STOP there. They could add things like...

1. Total civilian disarmament.
2. Socialization of industry.
3. Confiscation of private property.
4. Torture of citizens.
5. Suppression of the Press and of Religion
6. Disposal of the requirement that you have to be a natural born citizen of
the US to be president....hmmm.

This would be political suicide if this goes through.

Christian Worldview Network - Brannon Howse - U.S. Two States Away from Constitutional Convention

For people who don't know about the dangers of a Constitutional Convention, watch these.

YouTube - Beware Article V (part 1 of 4)

YouTube - Beware Article V (part 2 of 4)

YouTube - Beware Article V (part 3 of 4)

YouTube - Beware Article V (part 4 of 4)
 
Any proposals adopted by convention would have to be approved by 3/4 of the states.
 
What's wrong with having a Constitutional amendment to balance the budget? The way I see it, if Congress can't or doesn't want to do it, the people of this nation can force them to.

This is the issue that Republicans have really screwed the pooch on, and what has made them irrelevant today. We ALREADY have Democrats.
 
danarhea said:
What's wrong with having a Constitutional amendment to balance the budget? The way I see it, if Congress can't or doesn't want to do it, the people of this nation can force them to.

This is the issue that Republicans have really screwed the pooch on, and what has made them irrelevant today. We ALREADY have Democrats.
Click to expand...

The problem is that according to the Constitution, a constitutional convention does not have to be limited to the issue that it is being convened for. It doesn't even have to stop at an amendment. It could adopt a whole new constitution.

VERY DANGEROUS thing that they are playing with here.
 
ludahai said:
The problem is that according to the Constitution, a constitutional convention does not have to be limited to the issue that it is being convened for. It doesn't even have to stop at an amendment. It could adopt a whole new constitution.

VERY DANGEROUS thing that they are playing with here.
Click to expand...

That's right. You people need to read the article and watch the films. THEY DON'T HAVE TO STOP AT JUST ONE AMENDMENT! They can totally rewrite the Constitution if they want to.
 
ludahai said:
The problem is that according to the Constitution, a constitutional convention does not have to be limited to the issue that it is being convened for. It doesn't even have to stop at an amendment. It could adopt a whole new constitution.

VERY DANGEROUS thing that they are playing with here.
Click to expand...

Yes...assuming that 3/4 of the state legislatures approve the amendments. Its not like they just go into a back room, close the door, and come out with a new constitution. The idea that such a convention, specifically provided for in the constitution, is a threat to the constitution is amusing.
 
Iriemon said:
Any proposals adopted by convention would have to be approved by 3/4 of the states.
Click to expand...

Wrong. 3/4 of the states only have to say they want a convention...after that, it's all downhill. Congress can throw anything they want in there, and with these ****ing clowns, that is a VERY dangerous thing.
 
Invayne said:
Wrong. 3/4 of the states only have to say they want a convention...after that, it's all downhill. Congress can throw anything they want in there, and with these ****ing clowns, that is a VERY dangerous thing.
Click to expand...

Wrong. That is just completely and utterly false. It is not even how the convention is called. TWO THIRDS, not 3/4 of the states must call for a convention for it to happen, first of all. So that would be your first ridiculous error. Secondly, the convention does not have the power to ratify its own amendments. It didn't even have this power with the ORIGINAL convention, when our constitution was adopted! Remember the whole has to go to the states and 9 of them need to ratify it thing?
 
BlueKC said:
Yes...assuming that 3/4 of the state legislatures approve the amendments. Its not like they just go into a back room, close the door, and come out with a new constitution. The idea that such a convention, specifically provided for in the constitution, is a threat to the constitution is amusing.
Click to expand...

Read the article.

You may have heard the states can control the subject of any convention. In truth no restrictive language from any state can legally limit the scope or outcome of a Convention! Once a Convention is called Congress determines how the delegates to the Convention are chosen. Once chosen, those Convention delegates possess more power than the U.S. Congress itself; if it were not so they would not be able to change the U.S. Constitution!
Click to expand...

As former Chief Justice Warren Burger said in a letter written to Phyllis Schlafly, President of Eagle Forum:
"...there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the convention would obey. After a convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don't like its agenda. The meeting in 1787 ignored the limit placed by the confederation Congress..."
Click to expand...
 
Invayne said:
Read the article.
Click to expand...

Read this article. It's called Article V. It comes after Article IV and before Article VI in the constitution.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress

It's really not that complicated.

EDIT: Oh, and by the way, I do not consider the "Christian Worldview Network" a legitimate source. So I could really care less about what they have to say. Show it to me in the Constitution.
 
Last edited:
BlueKC said:
Wrong. That is just completely and utterly false. It is not even how the convention is called. TWO THIRDS, not 3/4 of the states must call for a convention for it to happen, first of all. So that would be your first ridiculous error. Secondly, the convention does not have the power to ratify its own amendments. It didn't even have this power with the ORIGINAL convention, when our constitution was adopted! Remember the whole has to go to the states and 9 of them need to ratify it thing?
Click to expand...

2/3--you're right. I just picked up 3/4 from this post and the number stuck in my head...
Iriemon said:
Any proposals adopted by convention would have to be approved by 3/4 of the states.
Click to expand...
 
Invayne said:
2/3--you're right. I just picked up 3/4 from this post and the number stuck in my head...
Click to expand...

So are you merely conceding that point, or the entire sensationalist attack upon the constitution in general? I'm also awaiting your admission that 3/4 of the state legislatures will be required to ratify such amendments, an enormous check upon the system.
 
Strange I haven't heard a single mention of the supposed plan for a convention. So is this some secret plan being plotted?
 
Danahea wrote
Quote
(We ALREADY have Democrats.)

Not precisely true.
It would be more accurate to say we already have Politicians.

And if by now you have not realized that every Politician is out for themselves.
They treat the Taxpayer as their own personal banks.
 
Invayne said:
2/3--you're right. I just picked up 3/4 from this post and the number stuck in my head...
Click to expand...

3/4 is the fraction of states that must approve (ratify) any proposals adopted by a convention.
 
Sadly, there is an incredible amount of incorrect information and outright intentional disinformation that has shaped so many views about the Article V convention option that our beloved Founders gave us in OUR Constitution because they correctly foresaw that citizens would eventually lose trust in the federal government. Fear has been intentionally instilled in so many people who really want to keep the current, status quo and corrupt political system. Open your mind and go to Welcome to Friends Of the Article V Convention to learn all the true facts about the Article V convention option. If you fear a convention, then you have been brainwashed - not your fault, of course, but you can correct this by learning the truth.

For example, there are safeguards so that you really do not have to fear what a convention might PROPOSE. Because anything it proposes must be ratified by 3/4 of the states, which is a very tough hurdle to overcome. Plus, imagine the incredible public and media attention to the nation's first Article V convention.

Our group Friends of the Article V convention is a nonpartisan national group with the single mission of compelling Congress to obey the Constitution and give us the first Article V convention. We do not advocate for or against any specific amendment.
 
Invayne said:
Has anybody heard about this?

This is very dangerous for our country, especially with the congress that we have today. They can stick ANY amendment in there that they want, and we have NO say over the matter. Yesterday I received an email saying they were only 2 states away from the 34 they need to hold one...Ohio and one more. It looks like Ohio caved.
Laws, Acts, and Legislation
They want to hold a convention for a balanced budget amendment. What alot of people don't realize is they DON'T HAVE TO STOP there. They could add things like...

1. Total civilian disarmament.
2. Socialization of industry.
3. Confiscation of private property.
4. Torture of citizens.
5. Suppression of the Press and of Religion
6. Disposal of the requirement that you have to be a natural born citizen of
the US to be president....hmmm.
Click to expand...

1. Bittersweet. Our fear of this represents our nation's distrust of the government... and each other.

2. We already have that (bailouts, anyone?).

3. Already have that (search and seizure/repossession).

4. Already have that (prison system).

5. Uhhh?! Already have that! Hello! Since religion is a political device used worldwide, they actually are a potential threat to national security, though.

6. This... is appalling.
 
I also wanted to mention: in that they are the commander in chiefs of our military, United States presidents should definitely have served in the military. And ranked.
 
Eko Ren said:
I also wanted to mention: in that they are the commander in chiefs of our military, United States presidents should definitely have served in the military. And ranked.
Click to expand...

Why? That automatically eliminates a huge portion of the population doesn't it?
 
statusquobuster said:
Sadly, there is an incredible amount of incorrect information and outright intentional disinformation that has shaped so many views about the Article V convention option that our beloved Founders gave us in OUR Constitution because they correctly foresaw that citizens would eventually lose trust in the federal government. Fear has been intentionally instilled in so many people who really want to keep the current, status quo and corrupt political system. Open your mind and go to Welcome to Friends Of the Article V Convention to learn all the true facts about the Article V convention option. If you fear a convention, then you have been brainwashed - not your fault, of course, but you can correct this by learning the truth.

For example, there are safeguards so that you really do not have to fear what a convention might PROPOSE. Because anything it proposes must be ratified by 3/4 of the states, which is a very tough hurdle to overcome. Plus, imagine the incredible public and media attention to the nation's first Article V convention.

Our group Friends of the Article V convention is a nonpartisan national group with the single mission of compelling Congress to obey the Constitution and give us the first Article V convention. We do not advocate for or against any specific amendment.
Click to expand...

From your(?) website:

To help the public understand the difference between an Article V Convention, which FOAVC fully supports, and a "constitutional convention" that would rethink the entirety of our current Constitution, which FOAVC emphatically does not support;
Click to expand...

They're calling for a constitutional convention, which you do NOT support. Tell us WHY you don't support it, please.
 
Eko Ren said:
I also wanted to mention: in that they are the commander in chiefs of our military, United States presidents should definitely have served in the military. And ranked.
Click to expand...
There are nutbags that argue the PotUS is only CinC once war has been declared by Congress, and only for as long as said decalred state of war exists.
:roll:
 
We still have a constitution? Could have fooled me.

Here is a link to a site which lists states have called for a convention.

I also found an article on WND, and yes...I know some people have problems with their credibility. It is stated in this article that the American Policy Institute is the organization that issued the alert. And then their is the fact that Obama believes the Constitution is flawed.

YouTube - Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered
 
mj278 said:
We still have a constitution? Could have fooled me.

Here is a link to a site which lists states have called for a convention.

I also found an article on WND, and yes...I know some people have problems with their credibility. It is stated in this article that the American Policy Institute is the organization that issued the alert. And then their is the fact that Obama believes the Constitution is flawed.

YouTube - Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered
Click to expand...

Yep. And your sig pretty much says it all.:(
 
mj278 said:
Could have fooled me.

Here is a link to a site which lists states have called for a convention.
Click to expand...

Interesting that the bulk of the "red" states are the ones most represented on the list.
 
Iriemon said:
Interesting that the bulk of the "red" states are the ones most represented on the list.
Click to expand...

I did read in the article that Republicans are calling for this...WTF are they thinking????:roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom