Article V of The Constitution...

[smitty]

It's amazing what's in the Constitution to solve out of control government! 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[westend1]

LOL!  Abbott got rich by suing his neighbor when a tree fell on him after a storm.   Idiot now proposes tort reform.  How do you spell hypocrit?

[baddog]

.....with a "e" at the end.

[westend1]

2 minutes ago, baddog said:

.....with a "e" at the end.

LOL.  Thought that didn't look right but too lazy to look it up.

[baddog]

Well I certainly don't have all the answers. I will say that anyone who is afraid of a 2/3 majority vote on anything does not believe in democracy. I think we can all agree that the federal government has overstepped its bounds with the power of the pen only.

[westend1]

It seems Abbott believes that the constitution is a living document.   Who would have thought?

[Hagar]

1 hour ago, baddog said:

Well I certainly don't have all the answers. I will say that anyone who is afraid of a 2/3 majority vote on anything does not believe in democracy. I think we can all agree that the federal government has overstepped its bounds with the power of the pen only.

With the big majority of States with Rep Governors & Rep Congress', it's not out of the realm of possibility.   Plus the fact that Obama is acting more like a dictator than a president.  It's worth a shot.  

Heaven knows we have a LOT to lose if no one does anything.  

[smitty]

5 hours ago, westend1 said:

It seems Abbott believes that the constitution is a living document.   Who would have thought?

This is obviously an anti-Abbott and anti-Constitution statement.  But when a liberal talks about the Constitution being a living, breathing document, they are talking about is that it should be constantly changing.  Changing away from the ORIGINAL meaning.  Abbot is talking about using the original meaning/intent, Article 5, to correct abusive and out of control government.  BTW -- you might want to read the 10th Amendment to the Constitution and tell this forum what you see.  We'll be waiting...

Let me clarify: When I said that liberals think that the Constitution should be constantly changing, I'm talking about they think that it should be interpreted differently based on the present time without going through the legal way of changing the Constitution.

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, westend1 said:

It seems Abbott believes that the constitution is a living document.   Who would have thought?

Everyone thinks that it is a living document as long as it is lawfully amended. The typical "living document" criticism is against the progressives that do not want to amend it but merely change the meaning from original intent without such an amendment. 

[Hagar]

Off subject but the same problems apply to many Christians.  As Smitty says above, "interpreted differently based on the present times".   

While we can't change or ammend The Bible, we can ammend the Constitution.  But no one is suppose to just arbitrarily use his or her interpretation to impose laws/rules on citizens. 

[RETIREDFAN1]

Article III, Section 2 

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

 

 Article III provided Congress with the power to set what is and what is not under the jurisdiction of the courts...with a simple majority vote, Congress take from the jurisdiction of the courts anything they want to....with a simple majority vote, Congress could say that abortion cases are no longer under the jurisdiction of the courts, for example......with a simple majority vote, Congress could say cases involving the definition of marriage are no longer under the jurisdiction of the court.........the Founders gave us MANY ways to avoid the tyrannical government that is in power today....it just takes will and effort to use them.....

[Hagar]

39 minutes ago, Colmesneilfan1 said:

Article III, Section 2 

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

 

 Article III provided Congress with the power to set what is and what is not under the jurisdiction of the courts...with a simple majority vote, Congress take from the jurisdiction of the courts anything they want to....with a simple majority vote, Congress could say that abortion cases are no longer under the jurisdiction of the courts, for example......with a simple majority vote, Congress could say cases involving the definition of marriage are no longer under the jurisdiction of the court.........the Founders gave us MANY ways to avoid the tyrannical government that is in power today....it just takes will and effort to use them.....

Dadgum C1, you must be a Prof of History at U of C lol.  Seriously, your post are very informative.  Unfortunately, this one reinforces an epiphany I had several months ago.   That, from my view, we're down to a one party system.  My view being conservative.  Most Republicans act like Democrats and today's Democrats are Socialist.  I'm beginning to feel like one of those folks walking around with a sign saying, "The end is near" lol.  

[RETIREDFAN1]

There is no measurable difference between the republican establishment and the dimocratic establishment.....they are all liberals......I'm waiting for the day when the majority of Conservatives realize this and dump the dead old party for a real Conservative party.......