Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 2 votes

Sen Rand Paul proposes new amendment


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1    spartan max2

spartan max2

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,689 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • People get mad when it rains or it shines but no one gets mad at the moon

Posted 22 October 2013 - 07:07 PM

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su


http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011
Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'



" I imagine that the intellegent people are the ones so intellegent that they dont even need or want to look "intellegent" anymore".
Criss Jami

#2    CyberKen

CyberKen

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,778 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 22 October 2013 - 07:10 PM

View Postspartan max2, on 22 October 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su


http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011
Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'


New Leadership in the U.S. Senate : Senator Rand Paul , Senator Ted Cruz , Senator Mike Lee :tu:


#3    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 22 October 2013 - 07:10 PM

View Postspartan max2, on 22 October 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su


http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011
Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'



I like it. It's a good idea :tu: .....Although our Constitution already has provisions in it, that reign in the Federal government, but they just ignore it anyway....


#4    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,779 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 22 October 2013 - 07:11 PM

View Postspartan max2, on 22 October 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su


http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011
Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'



Self understood in the existing constitution and therefore needs no special amendment. Now,if they ignore the existing ones,or don't know what the existing ones mean then this is just a piece of grandstanding.It will be ignored like so many other amendments.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#5    CyberKen

CyberKen

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,778 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 22 October 2013 - 07:19 PM

View PostKowalski, on 22 October 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

I like it. It's a good idea :tu: .....Although our Constitution already has provisions in it, that reign in the Federal government, but they just ignore it anyway....

This will get everybodys attention.

Okay, why is this necessary?  Oh , so THAT'S what they're doing!


#6    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 15,248 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 22 October 2013 - 07:22 PM

View PostKowalski, on 22 October 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

I like it. It's a good idea :tu: .....Although our Constitution already has provisions in it, that reign in the Federal government, but they just ignore it anyway....
"Congress shall make no law" is the clearest possible language though, it would have to add some difficulty to the processes of over-legislating/administrating and activist-judging.

"The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the Legislature.  The Executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question" ~ James Madison
"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#7    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 5,507 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 22 October 2013 - 07:28 PM

Since I don't like Rand Paul's agenda, and this must be part of his agenda, I don't think it's a good idea.

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
To see reality loose your opinions.

#8    spartan max2

spartan max2

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,689 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • People get mad when it rains or it shines but no one gets mad at the moon

Posted 22 October 2013 - 07:36 PM

View PostStarMountainKid, on 22 October 2013 - 07:28 PM, said:

Since I don't like Rand Paul's agenda, and this must be part of his agenda, I don't think it's a good idea.

I can understand that logic.


But I have to ask, what about his "agenda" do you not like?

" I imagine that the intellegent people are the ones so intellegent that they dont even need or want to look "intellegent" anymore".
Criss Jami

#9    PersonFromPorlock

PersonFromPorlock

    Pooseycat

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,769 posts
  • Joined:15 May 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • Few things do more harm than the belief that life should be Dramatic.

Posted 22 October 2013 - 08:01 PM

I appreciate the idea, but it seems a little overwritten to me. Why not just "Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not applicable in the same way to any member of the civil government of the United States."

I say "applicable in the same way" because if we say "equally applicable" they'll be writing laws that exempt X and claiming they're "equally applicable" to anyone who qualifies as X. The carve-out for "civil government" reflects the fact that the military is a whole different place.


#10    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 15,248 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 22 October 2013 - 08:16 PM

In the interest against verbosity, even if we only got Section 1 passed, it would mean a great deal to our yet-to-be-written legal futures.

"The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the Legislature.  The Executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question" ~ James Madison
"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#11    aztek

aztek

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,620 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 22 October 2013 - 08:57 PM

i doubt it'll pass, even if it does, loopholes will be found.

RESIDENT TROLL.

#12    pallidin

pallidin

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,099 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 22 October 2013 - 10:26 PM

View Postspartan max2, on 22 October 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su


http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011
Below is from his site.


JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'


Hahahahahahaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That has got to be one of the dumbest, immature and inane proposals I have ever heard.

The closest it will even get to "committee" is their garbage bin.


#13    green_dude777

green_dude777

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,069 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • When you look back in life, you don't regret what you did, you regret what you never attempted.

Posted 22 October 2013 - 10:49 PM

View PostStarMountainKid, on 22 October 2013 - 07:28 PM, said:

Since I don't like Rand Paul's agenda, and this must be part of his agenda, I don't think it's a good idea.

C'mon Star, I know you're smarter than that.  Dumb people can have smart ideas.  I mean, even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

View Postpallidin, on 22 October 2013 - 10:26 PM, said:


Hahahahahahaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That has got to be one of the dumbest, immature and inane proposals I have ever heard.

The closest it will even get to "committee" is their garbage bin.

I'm really confused by this response.  How is the proposal dumb, immature, or insane?  I think it's common sense, and kind of sad it isn't already assumed.


#14    spartan max2

spartan max2

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,689 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • People get mad when it rains or it shines but no one gets mad at the moon

Posted 22 October 2013 - 10:58 PM

View Postpallidin, on 22 October 2013 - 10:26 PM, said:


Hahahahahahaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That has got to be one of the dumbest, immature and inane proposals I have ever heard.

The closest it will even get to "committee" is their garbage bin.

I can understand not liking a politician. And I can understand people saying he is just grandstanding.

But Im confused how it is immature dumb or inane?

" I imagine that the intellegent people are the ones so intellegent that they dont even need or want to look "intellegent" anymore".
Criss Jami

#15    pallidin

pallidin

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,099 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 22 October 2013 - 11:46 PM

View Postspartan max2, on 22 October 2013 - 10:58 PM, said:

I can understand not liking a politician. And I can understand people saying he is just grandstanding.

But Im confused how it is immature dumb or inane?

I just think the wording of the proposal sounds like it was drafted by a 12 year-old.

Edited by pallidin, 22 October 2013 - 11:47 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users