The Debate On Whether We Should Change The American Constitution

Benjamin Franklin once said in 1787 “I confess that there are several parts of this Constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them. For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. ”

But is he right? My opinion is that we shouldn’t tamper with the constitution to a certain extent because there are some things that need to change like the right to privacy. But on the other hand, if we start to change it then that means more people in the office can do bad things to the constitution if they had a lot of states on their side. They could screw it up.

In order for people to change the constitution 38 out of 50 states have to agree to the change which is close to impossible.

Here are some examples of really foolish things that people tried to put in the constitution; 1). Select the presidents by lottery? 2). Change the name of the country to the United States of the World? 3). Outlawed drunkenness, prohibited divorce, or prohibit duelist from holding public office. Only 27 out of 11,000 changes have been ratified.

This is a few of many things that people have tried to do for this country. Think about it, if we had changed the name of our country to the United States of the World, that could have created conflict with other countries and even maybe create a war. I do not see why we are having a big debate over if we should change the Constitution.

Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc v. Federal Election Commission The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) prohibits corporate funds from being used for certain political advertisements in the 60-day period to an election.

I agree with this because someone can pay someone to get dirty things on their components advertisement in order to win.

When I mentioned that one person wanted to pick our president by lottery. That would a huge mistake. Selecting a president by lottery can cause a lot more of conflict involving people cheating and “rigging the lottery” to let someone win. When I look at this possible change all I see is our country getting more and more split apart.

How about if we outlawed drunkenness, prohibited divorce, or forbade duelist from holding public office.

What was this person even thinking when he or she came up with this. This rejected change does not make any sense that I’m getting a headache just by looking at it. I mean if we prohibit divorce that would create another list of complications to go over. If we couldn’t divorce it would be a catastrophe. In my eyes, this would cause more crimes than good. If you are married to a guy you thought was good, then get into a physical fight with him or her. Someone will get really hurt and you won’t be able to divorce him or her.

One of the things that Congress is considering to put in the constitution is that immigrants will be allowed to become president. (Frank, 2010)

Ok now, this is ridiculous, brought to the next level. Here two opinions regarding this subject. Here are some examples of really foolish things that people tried to put in the constitution; 1). What if we selected the presidents by lottery? 2). Change the name of the country to the United States of the World? 3). How about if we outlawed drunkenness, prohibited divorce, or forbade duelist from holding public office. Only 27 out of 11,000 changes have been ratified.

This is a few of many things that people have tried to do for this country. Think about it, if we had changed the name of our country to the United States of the World, that could have created conflict with other countries and even maybe create a war. I do not see why we are having a big debate over if we should change the Constitution.

John Yinger once said, “Yes, My son, Jonah, came to the U. S. from Vietnam as a 4-month-old baby. When his second - grade class studied the presidency, he was told that he cannot run for President when he grows up, even if he wants to; according to the Constitution, only “natural born Citizens” can be president.

I understand what this person is saying, But there are some down truths. If we start to let foreigners become president then this country could start to go for the worst more than it already is. This world is already being filled up with senseless things like the debate in abortion should be allowed. They have now passed a law that you can kill a baby even when it is fully grown. Now, how sickening is that. I mean there are laws prohibiting people from killing certain animals but you are allowed to kill a baby. It’s just wrong to do that. I guess that allowing abortion is a way to execute population control. If we let foreigners become president then they might want to carry out the plan to make this country a socialist country. Which has never worked EVER! The U. S being corrupted if you ask me.

Mathew Spalding once said, “No, Americans have always been open to foreign-born immigrants becoming full and equal citizens - with one exception: Only “natural-born Citizen” can be president. In general, constitution amendments should be pursued only after careful consideration, when it is necessary to address a great national issue and when it is broad-based support among the American people. That is not the case here. ”

I also get what this person is saying but some of what he said is bogus just because something was in our constitution for a long time dose mean we have to keep it that way. BUT, if we let babies from other countries become president when they grow up we still have to be careful on who we pic because the parents might influence them kid to do bad things in office.

There four states my piont on why we should but shouldn’t change the constitution. But still should be careful on what specific thing we change. We need boundaries on what we change and how we change it.

References

1. Frank, S. (2010, October 14). The top 10 amendments that haven't made it (yet) - National Constitution Center. Retrieved from https://constitutioncenter. org/blog/the-top-10-constitutional-amendments-that-havent-made-it-yet
2. Oak Hill Publishing Company. (n. d. ). Constitution Day materials, US Constitution, pocket Constitution book, Constitution crossword puzzles, Constitution glossary, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights. Retrieved from https://www. constitutionfacts. com/?section=funZone&page=famousquotes. cfm
3. Oyez. (2019, March 4). {{meta. pageTitle}}. Retrieved from https://www. oyez. org/cases/2005/04-1581
4. Ruane, M. E. (2016, March 9). We’ve tried to amend the Constitution 11,000 times, and not all the proposals were good. Retrieved from https://www. washingtonpost. com/local/weve-tried-to-amend-the-constitution-11000-times-and-not-all-the-proposals-were-good/2016/03/08/58bcb3d8-e555-11e5-bc08-3e03a5b41910_story. html?noredirect=on&utm_term=. 047279ed8967
5. Scholastic Inc. (2019). Should Naturalized Citizens Be President? | Scholastic. Retrieved from https://www. scholastic. com/teachers/articles/teaching-content/should-naturalized-citizens-be-president/
6. The U. S. National Archives and Records Administration. (2016). Constitutional Amendment process. Retrieved from https://www. archives. gov/federal-register/constitution
7. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission. (n. d. ). Oyez. Retrieved March 1, 2019, from https://www. oyez. org/cases/2005/04-1581