I'm getting increasing numbers of e-mails from folks I consider sensible promoting the call for a Constitutional Convention. Obviously these well-meaning individuals don't understand what it means. There is nothing in the Constitution that controls what a new Convention could do to our Founding Document. There are absolutely NO RESTRICTIONS on what the delegates can propose and the amendments they can approve.
Does anyone really think that our current flock of politicians on both sides of the aisle, not to mention our pernicious president with his billionaire buddies like George Soros, can do a better job at rewriting our founding documents than men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, George Mason, and the other giants of history? Consider a new Constitution that incorporates the long-dead Equal Rights Amendment or a gay rights amendment or a gun (and smoking) ban. No, a Constitutional Convention is a REALLY BAD IDEA. There is no controlling what it can do!
Pass this on and don't jump on the bandwagon when you don't know the tune they're playing. You may find yourself in the middle of a hard rock drug fest with the descendants of Woodstock.
David Dewhurst's delusional call for a constitutional convention
Who Needs a New Constitutional Convention?
Act now to reject Constitutional Convention
The author of course does not tell the full truth about a convention. Only by this means can she make her statements. For example, she fails the states have already applied in sufficient number to cause a convention call. You can read the over 700 applications from 49 states at www.foavc.org.
ReplyDeleteSo, given this fact, what she urges is the Constitution be overthrown. Is this the person you want to follow--someone who wants to overthrow the Constitution?
As to her comment no way exists in the Constitution to limit a convention. Perhaps she should read the Constitution before making comments. All a convention can do is propose amendments. It requires RATIFICATION to make any proposal part of the Constitution. She fails to mention this fact.
Again, do you want to believe someone who (1) doesn't support the Constitution and wants to overthrow it and (2) obviously doesn't even know enough about the subject to ever heard of the ratification procedure of Article V?
I suggest going to the www.foavc.org website to learn the truth.
Your own website contradicts what you're saying, Mr. Walker:
ReplyDelete"Article V of the United States Constitution provides that Congress, 'on the application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments...'. The Founding Fathers of our nation recognized the importance of providing this means by which the citizens of our country could initiate amendments TO CHANGE AND/OR CLARIFY (my emphasis) the Constitution; the fundamental document which they intended to be not only the blueprint for our federal system but also "the supreme Law of the Land".
There is nothing in Article V that mandates how delegates will be chosen. Once a Convention begins, the rule book is open and the delegates have the red pen. And, yes, I have read the Constitution - more than once. The Founders had no idea how their document would be distorted by activist courts and how a cowardly Congress would refuse to exercise its powers of impeachment and limitation of the courts through nullification. It is likely the courts will ultimately be ruling on the constitutionality of the procedures at a convention. It is a Pandora's box!
To claim I want to overthrow the Constitution is absurd! I think that is the likely outcome of a Constitutional Convention. Many who propose it talk about the Constitution being an obsolete document that needs "updating." I doubt if it would be recognizable when they finished the work.
Love Mrs Schlafly. We certainly do not need to redo the constitution, but we do need to add more amendments. For instance:
ReplyDeleteAbortion should be identified as a contradiction of "the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness", and is thereby not a law and must be prohibited.
Muslims should not hold state or federal positions as we cannot monitor or determine who is a culturally passive Muslim or active Muslim (religiously and culturally) seeing that the Muslim goal is to turn the world into Alllah worshipers by any means necessary, including deceit.
Marriage is between a man and a woman and cannot be contracted between people of the same sex.
Severe divorce penalties
Sales of the indecent films and images prohibited.
Philippus