By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - "CIA"-style black site discovered in Chicago

NobleTeam360 said:
McGilliguts said:


I am an American. The constitution was fine in its day, but surely it could be improved upon now, I mean the country is riddled with corruption and run by oligarchs. And in retrospect democracy wasn't really such a good idea after all. Anyone who believes that jesus rose from the dead for instance, isn't fit to make any decisions of any significance whatsoever in my opinion.

Yes the country has wide spread corruption becasue the constitution is being ignored. So you're saying that everyone who runs for public office should be an atheist or agnostic? 


Yes I am saying that. Because they would make better, more rational decisions. Why should the ignorami be given the power to determine the nation's course? franky, we'd all be better off ruled by an intellectual elite that could properly prioritize scientific advancement.



Around the Network
McGilliguts said:
NobleTeam360 said:

Yes the country has wide spread corruption becasue the constitution is being ignored. So you're saying that everyone who runs for public office should be an atheist or agnostic? 


Yes I am saying that. Because they would make better, more rational decisions. Why should the ignorami be given the power to determine the nation's course? franky, we'd all be better off ruled by an intellectual elite that could properly prioritize scientific advancement.

Yeah because GMO in our food and flouride in our water have been so great for us . If they wanted to actually advance humanity into a better future then sure why not, but all I see is a bunch of billionaire elites hijacking all the infrastructure and puting us into a slave society. I'd love if NASA would get the funding it got during the Cold War, I'd love it if we actually got real advancements in other tech than Military. Sadly that'll never happen under the current government we live with.



NobleTeam360 said:

Yes the country has wide spread corruption becasue the constitution is being ignored. 

No, the country has widespread corruption because the constitution has nothing to say on virtually all relevant matters, and we're forced to rely upon laws written post-facto, which don't even adhere to the original spirit of the constitution.

Jefferson believed the constitution should be re-written every 19 years. The average lifespan of a constitution is around 15 years. This is yet another area where the United States holds onto archaic practice and refuses to change for the better.

The United States Constitution was written at a time before repeating rifles were invented, before photographs or film existed, before electricity in homes, before the telegraph, before cars, before anything other than birds could fly, and before both cell and atomic theory. Why do you think this document has anything meaningful to say about life in a 21st century, first-world society?

Edit:

NobleTeam360 said: Yeah because GMO in our food and flouride in our water have been so great for us .

Really? You're really going to go there?



ofrm1 said:

NobleTeam360 said:

Yes the country has wide spread corruption becasue the constitution is being ignored. 

No, the country has widespread corruption because the constitution has nothing to say on virtually all relevant matters, and we're forced to rely upon laws written post-facto, which don't even adhere to the original spirit of the constitution.

Jefferson believed the constitution should be re-written every 19 years. The average lifespan of a constitution is around 15 years. This is yet another area where the United States holds onto archaic practice and refuses to change for the better.

The United States Constitution was written at a time before repeating rifles were invented, before photographs or film existed, before electricity in homes, before the telegraph, before cars, before anything other than birds could fly, and before both cell and atomic theory. Why do you think this document has anything meaningful to say about life in a 21st century, first-world society?

I'd say the Bill of Rights shouldn't have to change no matter how far into the future we go. Sure new laws will be needed (that's obvious) but trampling over basic rights should never be acceptable. 



ofrm1 said:

NobleTeam360 said:

Yes the country has wide spread corruption becasue the constitution is being ignored. 

No, the country has widespread corruption because the constitution has nothing to say on virtually all relevant matters, and we're forced to rely upon laws written post-facto, which don't even adhere to the original spirit of the constitution.

Jefferson believed the constitution should be re-written every 19 years. The average lifespan of a constitution is around 15 years. This is yet another area where the United States holds onto archaic practice and refuses to change for the better.

The United States Constitution was written at a time before repeating rifles were invented, before photographs or film existed, before electricity in homes, before the telegraph, before cars, before anything other than birds could fly, and before both cell and atomic theory. Why do you think this document has anything meaningful to say about life in a 21st century, first-world society?

Edit:

NobleTeam360 said: Yeah because GMO in our food and flouride in our water have been so great for us .

Really? You're really going to go there?


So who would write this new constitution? ALL the people listed in this thread who are the problem. We can even get simple things through congress and you expect them to agree on a constitution! Bawhahaha. If there was a new constitution it would be written by the oligarchs and politicians we so dispise. 



End of 2009 Predictions (Set, January 1st 2009)

Wii- 72 million   3rd Year Peak, better slate of releases

360- 37 million   Should trend down slightly after 3rd year peak

PS3- 29 million  Sales should pick up next year, 3rd year peak and price cut

Around the Network
NobleTeam360 said:
McGilliguts said:


Yes I am saying that. Because they would make better, more rational decisions. Why should the ignorami be given the power to determine the nation's course? franky, we'd all be better off ruled by an intellectual elite that could properly prioritize scientific advancement.

Yeah because GMO in our food and flouride in our water have been so great for us . If they wanted to actually advance humanity into a better future then sure why not, but all I see is a bunch of billionaire elites hijacking all the infrastructure and puting us into a slave society. I'd love if NASA would get the funding it got during the Cold War, I'd love it if we actually got real advancements in other tech than Military. Sadly that'll never happen under the current government we live with.

I agree, that's exactly what I'd like to see, a rational society pursuing a scientific utopia. Medical advances, new technology, space exploration and environmental restoration. And with a healthy appreciation for the arts.



bigjon said:
ofrm1 said:

Really? You're really going to go there?


So who would write this new constitution? ALL the people listed in this thread who are the problem. We can even get simple things through congress and you expect them to agree on a constitution! Bawhahaha. If there was a new constitution it would be written by the oligarchs and politicians we so dispise. 

True, true. 



NobleTeam360 said:
ofrm1 said:

No, the country has widespread corruption because the constitution has nothing to say on virtually all relevant matters, and we're forced to rely upon laws written post-facto, which don't even adhere to the original spirit of the constitution.

Jefferson believed the constitution should be re-written every 19 years. The average lifespan of a constitution is around 15 years. This is yet another area where the United States holds onto archaic practice and refuses to change for the better.

The United States Constitution was written at a time before repeating rifles were invented, before photographs or film existed, before electricity in homes, before the telegraph, before cars, before anything other than birds could fly, and before both cell and atomic theory. Why do you think this document has anything meaningful to say about life in a 21st century, first-world society?

I'd say the Bill of Rights shouldn't have to change no matter how far into the future we go. Sure new laws will be needed (that's obvious) but trampling over basic rights should never be acceptable. 

If you're talking about vague expressions of freedom, like freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, petition, etc. Then yes. However, those are expressions that everyone realizes in modern society. So what do you do when someone wants to buy a gun with a 100 round magazine? The constitution has nothing to say about it because it didn't exist when it was written. What do you do when someone wants to listen in on a phone call? Phones didn't exist then. I could go on and on. Having an old, archaic document that merely expresses basic freedoms does nothing to help the citizens of the nation because those freedoms don't mean anything if they aren't detailed and precise. The way to solve these problems is the same way that other countries with constitutions solves them; create a new draft of the constitution and ratify it. Instead of taking a 200 year-old quilt and constantly patching the holes which keep getting larger and larger, just make a whole new quilt and be done with it.

Also, it's not as if those expressions of freedom were new or original during the late 18th century. They're lifted almost wholesale from Hobbes, Locke, and to a lesser extent, Rousseau. So it's not as if these rights came from the framers to begin with.



ofrm1 said:
NobleTeam360 said:

I'd say the Bill of Rights shouldn't have to change no matter how far into the future we go. Sure new laws will be needed (that's obvious) but trampling over basic rights should never be acceptable. 

If you're talking about vague expressions of freedom, like freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, petition, etc. Then yes. However, those are expressions that everyone realizes in modern society. So what do you do when someone wants to buy a gun with a 100 round magazine? The constitution has nothing to say about it because it didn't exist when it was written. What do you do when someone wants to listen in on a phone call? Phones didn't exist then. I could go on and on. Having an old, archaic document that merely expresses basic freedoms does nothing to help the citizens of the nation because those freedoms don't mean anything if they aren't detailed and precise. The way to solve these problems is the same way that other countries with constitutions solves them; create a new draft of the constitution and ratify it. Instead of taking a 200 year-old quilt and constantly patching the holes which keep getting larger and larger, just make a whole new quilt and be done with it.

Also, it's not as if those expressions of freedom were new or original during the late 18th century. They're lifted almost wholesale from Hobbes, Locke, and to a lesser extent, Rousseau. So it's not as if these rights came from the framers to begin with.

But like big jon said in a post before, who is going to write this new constitution? the people that are already infringing on our basic freedoms right now? I surely hope not as I would not want to live in this country then . Anyway like I said new laws should be made as technology advances. 

 

Also 100 round magazines? I don't think anybody makes those for civilian use. Could be wrong though,



Follow the money and all is revealed.