Constitutional amendments

[Emsworth]

Congress should be given the power to regulate interstate emissions.

What do you mean by interstate emissions? Emissions that will possibly travel across state lines?

In any event, I agree that it has no such power at present.

[A18]

Emissions that pollute more than one state.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

An amendment that does the following:

-Protects strip clubs from stupid regulations. All strip club regulations are hereby repealed and now all strip clubs can be fully nude ones with lapdances.
-Establishes gay marriage
-Abolishes the death penalty
-Removes the native born requirement for the Presidency
-Establishes a restriction on the military like in Japan's constitution
-Mandates national health care
-Outlaws school uniforms
-Changes the US to a parlimentary system with Proportional Representation

[Emsworth]

-Protects strip clubs from stupid regulations. All strip club regulations are hereby repealed and now all strip clubs can be fully nude ones with lapdances...
-Outlaws school uniforms

If the Constitution includes either of these provisions, it is unfit to exist, and is not worth the paper on which it is written. Constitutions are meant to establish the framework of government, and to protect the broad, important, significant rights of the People. It would be sullied by mention of something so specific as strip clubs or school uniforms.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Well the first amendment should cover these two, but since apparentely that's not working, we need to codify it.

[Emsworth]

Well the first amendment should cover these two, but since apparentely that's not working, we need to codify it.

The First Amendment does not cover strip club regulation. Participating in the activities of a strip club is engaging in commerce, not expression. If we accept such a broad interpretation of "speech," then I could claim that the owners of Wal-Mart have a constitutional right "express themselves" by paying wages below the federal minimum.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Well if that's the case we need to stop people from enforcing their prudery.

Besides, how is it any different from the Flag Burning Amendment?

[A18]

-Protects strip clubs from stupid regulations. All strip club regulations are hereby repealed and now all strip clubs can be fully nude ones with lapdances...
-Outlaws school uniforms

If the Constitution includes either of these provisions, it is unfit to exist, and is not worth the paper on which it is written. Constitutions are meant to establish the framework of government, and to protect the broad, important, significant rights of the People. It would be sullied by mention of something so specific as strip clubs or school uniforms.

No, it is the other ones that would make the Constitution illegitimate. It would no longer bind the conscience, and rebellion would be justified.

[Emsworth]

Besides, how is it any different from the Flag Burning Amendment?

The Flag Burning Amendment is also a horrible amendment, infringing upon the freedom of expression (although it does have the saving grace of not including something so crude and vulgar as a statement of how much nudity is allowed in strip clubs).

No, it is the other ones that would make the Constitution illegitimate. It would no longer bind the conscience, and rebellion would be justified.

Certainly, any part of the Constitution which mandates national healthcare would be unfit. Some of the others, while terrible ideas (especially insomuch as they unduly restrain the states, and federalize issues like marriage and capital punishment), are not intolerable violations of conscience.

[Jake]

Well if that's the case we need to stop people from enforcing their prudery.

Besides, how is it any different from the Flag Burning Amendment?

Those burning flags are not doing so for profit. When strippers start stripping simply to express themselves and not receive compensation for it, then you could argue it is included under free expression (which isn't even a right).

[A18]

Clearly music falls under free speech, even if you pay for it.

But you have to draw the line somewhere. Is killing someone "free expression?"