View Poll Results: Read the intro and vote accordingly

Voters
55. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1st Amendment

    4 7.27%
  • 2nd Amendment

    11 20.00%
  • 4th Amendment

    1 1.82%
  • 9th Amendment

    0 0%
  • 14th Amendment

    8 14.55%
  • Other.

    31 56.36%
Page 5 of 19 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 181

Thread: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

  1. #41
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    22,045

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    I would change the 4th amendment. At this point in time its just a little too damned vague and leaves too much up in the air for decisions to be made and then overturned in the legal system. Too much is up to a judge who may decide differently than another judge and thus it is difficult for Police and Government Officials to determine if their actions are reasonable when 4 different judges will give them 4 different opinions of the reasonableness of their actions.

  2. #42
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,178

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    I would change this part of the 14th "All persons born or naturalized in the United States" to "All person born to female citizens or naturalized in the United States".I would say "all persons born to citizens" but an illegal could claim that an American whom coincidently no one can find is the father.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  3. #43
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    America (A.K.A., a red state)
    Last Seen
    09-24-13 @ 11:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,317

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    - As opposed to neo-cons who want to "change" equal rights and due process the moment it gets in their way? Oh pubby. Your hypocrisy.
    I'm not sure what this vague smear is referring to, but I'm talking about Democrats...

    -lying about a vote they lost in the House, destroying the record, and changing the results

    -trying to pass the "Fairness" Doctrine

    -trying to strip workers of basic voting rights

    -assaulting conservative speakers

    -banning conservative books...

    These things (and there are more) are actual violations of the right to dissent protected by the 1st Amendment. Conservatives are not advocating any such thing.
    Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner (paraphrasing James Bovard).

  4. #44
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    America (A.K.A., a red state)
    Last Seen
    09-24-13 @ 11:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,317

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Unless it involves burning the flag.
    Being told you cannot set something on fire in no way violates your right to express dissent. Flag-burning is a way of expressing dissent, not dissent itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Or New York art exhibits that the troglodyte mayor deems anti-religious.


    Mayor Guiliani choosing to stop giving taxpayer dollars to an "artist" smearing one group of people's religion in no way violates their right to dissent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Or websites that you consider harmful to children. Or images of boobs on television.
    Boobs and porn sites in no way constitute dissent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Or just about anything else that conservatives find offensive.
    If you can come up with a single example to back up your claim that isn't Constitutionally illiterate hysteria, let me know. Meanwhile, liberals are still the ones prone to suppressing Constitutional free speech rights.
    Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner (paraphrasing James Bovard).

  5. #45
    Banned NguyenRhymesWithWin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    11-20-14 @ 04:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    272

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    I'd change the part that says it's a living document that serves a guideline for politicians and ensures our rights because it certainly does not.

    If I need to prove that I'm not a dangerous person and I'm capable of owning and carrying a gun in order to exercise my 2nd Amendment right, I think we should do the same for Free Speech. If you can prove that you have only the interests of the United States in mind and if you can prove you're not against Democracy and Capitalism, then you are allowed to speak freely.

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    Quote Originally Posted by FallingPianos View Post
    actually, I was thinking more in terms of WMDs then firearms.
    I would agree with clerifying that the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to WMD's.

    Quote Originally Posted by FallingPianos View Post
    what would happen, is that any abortion method where the death of the fetus doesn't somehow make the procedure easier for the woman, would become illegal. any other method would be a legal form of self defense.
    In theory, Justifyable Homicide is, well, justified, and any abortion which is performed to protect the mother's life is acceptable; regardless of the exact procedure used.

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    I would change the first amendment to remove some of the loopholes like saying burning and American Flag is speech when in reality it has nothing to do with speech..........

    You cannot remove freedom of expression (even if it is flag-buring) without neutralizing freedom of speech.


  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    You cannot remove freedom of expression (even if it is flag-buring) without neutralizing freedom of speech.

    Flag burning, when not for respectfull disposal, is arson.

    Fire is not speach.

  9. #49
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Flag burning, when not for respectfull disposal, is arson.
    That's ridiculous. If you're burning someone else's flag who hasn't given you permission to burn it, then of course that should be illegal, as you have no right to destroy their property.

    But if you have your own flag, you're free to do whatever the hell you want to it as long as you aren't endangering anyone else. It's no one else's business.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry
    Fire is not speach.
    Ya, I've heard that a few times now. Is the brilliant legal mind who came up with this a member of DP? Or is this meme circulating elsewhere on the internets too? If so, I've officially lost faith in human intelligence.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #50
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 04:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: What Part of the Constitution Would you change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    I did not say throw the first amendment out, I said get rid of some of the loopholes that leftys like you take advantage of to circumvent the definition.........
    I disagree with your assertation that freedom of speech only applies to verbal speech. Heck, writing something down's not speech, but it should still be protected. The point of the matter is that the point of the amendment is that it is supposed to let us transmit any thought we want (with a few restrictions) from us to another person. The medium is not important. An act says just as much as a conversation. It may not be speaking, but it is still "speech"

Page 5 of 19 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •