If other, please elaborate below. Also, obviously, the 18th amendment is not included in this question since it has been repealed.
What is the worst amendment to the United States Constitution?
- Thread starter Charlie Don't Surf
- Start date
- Status
ElJuski
Staff member
For what it's worth, I actually support the 2nd amendment, as long as--like everything else--it's effectively used and maintained. Which obviously isn't happening, especially with all of those bullshit gun law loopholes. And yes, although it will never likely happen, the clause was there for the King of England, or Whoever, shoving his nose all up into your business...which I guess is good to have just in case of the implausibility that ever happens.
But I also know that just banning guns isn't a viable option either.
Really, I think the best way to fix the problem isn't the amendment, but is fixing the laws applicable where we can, and also, more importantly, continue to push for a less gun-nut culture. This country is really skewed in how desensitized it is to things going boom and making other things go splat.
But I also know that just banning guns isn't a viable option either.
Really, I think the best way to fix the problem isn't the amendment, but is fixing the laws applicable where we can, and also, more importantly, continue to push for a less gun-nut culture. This country is really skewed in how desensitized it is to things going boom and making other things go splat.
yeah that is not an amendment to the Constitution at all
the 17th kind of messed things up a bit, I think. it helped turn politics into a bigger circus than it was originally.
S
Soliloquy
The 28th one will probably suck.
1st Amendment... because I have to read pointed polls by internet fuckheads.
The other 9 amendments don't mean a thing without the 2nd.
Dave
Staff member
I love the way the choices are the 2nd amendment...and everything else. Nothing like a loaded question, huh?
But my least favorites and why are:
But my least favorites and why are:
- 18th Amendment - Of course, that was overturned. However, we learned nothing from it, hence the current war on drugs.
- 22nd Amendment - If a president is good and we want to keep him, let the voters decide. This amendment was put in to prevent the possibility of an incumbent using his (or her) office as a springboard to effectively keep the White House indefinitely. But others have said it's anti-democratic as it limits the choices of voters. Frankly I'd love another Clinton term or two, just as much as the Republicans wanted more Reagan.
- 26th Amendment - I have a lot of trouble with the way the US handles ages. Age to join the US military: 17. Age to vote: 18. Age to drink: 21. How does it make sense that a person is allowed to fight and die for the country but not be able to vote or drink? That's just fucking dumb. It's saying that we don't think you are mature enough to make choices with such things as electing someone to office and we sure don't trust you with alcohol! Your choices are bad and you should feel bad! Oh, but here's a weapon. Go into that highly stressful situation where lives are on the line - you are mature enough to make split-second decisions that could ruin lives.
I agree with you on all of these, especially the 22nd. I wish they'd extend it to maybe 3 terms, and extend each term by like 2 years. Honestly, a lot of modern plans and policies really need time to work (on both dem and rep fronts). The executive branch as a whole would greatly improve if the friggin white house wasn't election scrambling starting in year 3 of office.
Dave
Staff member
Year 3?!? Our politicians are ALWAYS in reelection mode. And if they are not they are called "lame duck" and nobody thinks they have to work with them.
Ya, pretty much IMO. In Canada we get virtually all of your political coverage up here, and it's nothing like our own. Ours is "simmer" most of the time (budget is the only time it really ramps up IMO, and very briefly), and then once the actual election is called (parliament dissolves), those 40 days are like your REST OF THE TIME. It's really fucked up what you guys do.
Dave
Staff member
Nope. It's something that is relatively new. It's really, really bad for members of the House as their terms are only 2 years and so they are always campaigning.
The biggest problem is that EVERYTHING is equated to reelection, even if it's only by the media. Health care? Obama is trying to get it to up his reelection chances. Immigration reform? It's just being done to woo the Hispanic vote. Repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell? Looking for the liberal gay vote.
It's pervasive and continuous.
The biggest problem is that EVERYTHING is equated to reelection, even if it's only by the media. Health care? Obama is trying to get it to up his reelection chances. Immigration reform? It's just being done to woo the Hispanic vote. Repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell? Looking for the liberal gay vote.
It's pervasive and continuous.
Necronic
Staff member
I think some of it's new and some of it isn't. Upton Sinclair's book "I Candidate for Governor" talks about how completely corrupt and screwed up politics were back then, as does any look back into the state of Texas politics back during LBJ's rise to power. On the other hand look at someone like JFK, where someone leaked information of his affairs to like 30 media outlets and all of them refused to run it as they believed it was "beneath them".
I would say that true corruption has actually gotten significantly better in the last hundred years or so, and transparency has increased dramatically, but on the flipside the media has become a feeding frenzy where there isn't an angle too narrow or a story too low.
The really sad thing about that, though, is that it's our fault, not the media's. We drive the ratings for Limbaugh or O'Reilly over shows like Frontline or Charlie Rose. I mean, would we even accept an Edward R Murrow in todays world? Considering the sad fact that his career ended over his desire to avoid infotainment....I don't think he has a place here anymore.
Edit: In fact I suggesnt you to simply read Murrow's speech "light's and wires in a box" from the early 60s (I think). It will give you the chills.
http://www.rtnda.org/pages/media_items/edward-r.-murrow-speech998.php
I would say that true corruption has actually gotten significantly better in the last hundred years or so, and transparency has increased dramatically, but on the flipside the media has become a feeding frenzy where there isn't an angle too narrow or a story too low.
The really sad thing about that, though, is that it's our fault, not the media's. We drive the ratings for Limbaugh or O'Reilly over shows like Frontline or Charlie Rose. I mean, would we even accept an Edward R Murrow in todays world? Considering the sad fact that his career ended over his desire to avoid infotainment....I don't think he has a place here anymore.
Edit: In fact I suggesnt you to simply read Murrow's speech "light's and wires in a box" from the early 60s (I think). It will give you the chills.
http://www.rtnda.org/pages/media_items/edward-r.-murrow-speech998.php
As cliche as it sounds, you can blame it all on the 24-hour news networks. They have to have something to fill all those minutes each day. They don't take the time to research a story, to gather REAL facts and have the stuff to back it up, they have to be the first to get the news out. To be the first to get it in front of the audience instead of getting it right the first time.
24-hour news is the downfall of real journalism.
That needed to be done a long time ago. As former Navy my opinion is DADT was retarded. It's all men are created equal, not all men are created equal except gays because eww.
I also support gay marriage (see me all men created equal thing) and the funny thing is is I think of myself as a republican even though I'm probably independent
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GasBandit
Staff member
The word you are looking for is Libertarian.
Too bad more to the Tolerant Republicans don't split off and join the Libertarian movement...
GasBandit
Staff member
Most americans are idiots who prefer the illusory simplicity of a false dichotomy to having to actually put effort into educating themselves about voting.
Or they find the Libertarian party just as distasteful as the Republicans and Democrats.
GasBandit
Staff member
Unlikely, if speaking of "tolerant republicans." Looney lefties with house avatars maybe.
Of course, there's the other side of the coin too, the guys who thinks Jesus says the government needs to pay their way through life, amen.
- Status