General Discussion

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)

26. Might I suggest you offer something to replace it with?

Sun Oct 13, 2013, 11:22 PM

Oct 2013

Because just eliminating it brings about its own problems. First, do you think the several states would just jump on the bandwagon of whatever we come up with here? What do we do with the states that reject the new governmental outline? Do we send the Military into Texas or Georgia and force them to comply?

What if the regions break apart and form mini countries? Do we fight a series of civil wars?

Despair at the status quo is fine. But suggesting a political/social/national upheaval of unimaginable complexity is a little rash. It took years to get everyone on board with this one when the issues were much simpler. Imagine it. Kansas refuses to join the new articles unless Gay Marriage is banned. Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi refuse as well. Then there is Abortion, are you ready to let the states dictate terms on that issue as conditions of participation?

Or are we going to abolish the Constitution and declare President Obama King? Because that might work for a little while, but the resulting civil war will make the French Revolution look like a family reunion.

The best you could hope for is a number of smaller regional nations that are loosely affiliated with a central government. That wouldn't work because the same laws would not apply across the board.

Just off the top of my head I can see nothing but disaster in any direction. There is no scenario I can come up with that ends well. Can anyone come up with something that we could replace the Constitution with that would be acceptable to all the states? Because I can't see how we could remain united.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

67 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

At what point can we say the Constitution has been a failure? [View all] Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 OP

Civic religion. That's really the long and short of it. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #1

Never. It's a living document. ScreamingMeemie Oct 2013 #2

It's nearly impossible to amend it now Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #3

Amendment process has not changed. MicaelS Oct 2013 #7

There have been five Constitutional amendments in my lifetime. hack89 Oct 2013 #48

Sorry, disagree with you here, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #4

I don't think anybody's going to kick down your door and drag you away for posting that OP. rrneck Oct 2013 #5

The Constitution is no match for Wall Street. Rex Oct 2013 #6

Good point Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #14

No. Its the polititians and courts Wall St owns... HooptieWagon Oct 2013 #38

What might you suggest replacing it with, and how would you get it accomplished?? madinmaryland Oct 2013 #8

+1 onenote Oct 2013 #10

Don't replace it all. Change the Legislature to a unicameral body like Nebraska where it's worked hooverville29 Oct 2013 #17

Good idea Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #18

Or if we're going to radically alter Congress, keep both bodies NuclearDem Oct 2013 #23

Anything is better than the dysfunction we have now. GreenPartyVoter Oct 2013 #28

1861. Nt. Warren Stupidity Oct 2013 #9

A huge problem is the big disparity in state size taught_me_patience Oct 2013 #11

Split California into North and South California; combine North and South Dakota, etc. FarCenter Oct 2013 #16

Do that and we're a lot less potent Democratic force n/t melody Oct 2013 #19

It would benefit the Democrats -- the margin in the senate would increase by 2 FarCenter Oct 2013 #45

The whole fight isn't about Congress melody Oct 2013 #46

The great failure in this country is education. DURHAM D Oct 2013 #12

I think it's basically good but needs a couple modifications treestar Oct 2013 #13

If I am not mistaken, some of the framers Downwinder Oct 2013 #15

You think a parliamentary system would be better? Azathoth Oct 2013 #20

Of course we should not allow the kind f gerrymandering we see today Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #21

In Florida, a few Dem incumbents aided and abetted... HooptieWagon Oct 2013 #41

Racist drivel with, thankfully, no recs. Skip Intro Oct 2013 #22

What's racist about my OP? Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #25

Oh please. Skip Intro Oct 2013 #30

It was written by older white men. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #32

They were white men.... Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #33

Wow. Skip Intro Oct 2013 #36

Because those old white men didn't give women the vote or treat African Americans as actual people? NuclearDem Oct 2013 #37

No they didn't. It was the times they were living in. SomethingFishy Oct 2013 #60

How did I use race and gender in a derogatory way? Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #44

It was written by white racist slave owners. morningfog Oct 2013 #54

how many white people were kept in slavery because of the constitution? CreekDog Oct 2013 #65

How on earth did you construe that as racist? NuclearDem Oct 2013 #27

Cali is trashing the Constitution, and uses race, age and gender Skip Intro Oct 2013 #31

And you're absolutely proving the point CD was making. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #34

Notice how he goes after me for mentioning the founding fathers were white men Cali_Democrat Oct 2013 #35

The lack of inclusion goes to the fallibility of the document. morningfog Oct 2013 #56

Actual racist often only see the reverse racism morningfog Oct 2013 #55

Reverse racism doesn't exist... Decaffeinated Oct 2013 #61

Yes, I know that. That is very much my point. morningfog Oct 2013 #62

So it's OK to scream "racist" when people point out that the Constitution was written by white men? ProSense Oct 2013 #39

It's not the constitution that's the problem. It's the idiots misinterpreting it. Initech Oct 2013 #24

Might I suggest you offer something to replace it with? Savannahmann Oct 2013 #26

Too many people treat it with religious relevance Nevernose Oct 2013 #29

I am awestruck that the Constitution is still going strong after 200+ years. Nye Bevan Oct 2013 #40

I don't think the Jamaal510 Oct 2013 #42

There is nothing wrong with the Constitution ProSense Oct 2013 #43

A couple of things. NCTraveler Oct 2013 #47

The problem is how vague and loosely construed it is. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #49

Agree almost 100% with your post. NCTraveler Oct 2013 #52

Well, when I mention radical, it's more in the context of different from how we do things NuclearDem Oct 2013 #57

I'd say, now, probably Spider Jerusalem Oct 2013 #50

When you are no longer allowed to ask that question. Puzzledtraveller Oct 2013 #51

It isn't the document as much as it is the ability to change interpretations rustydog Oct 2013 #53

Don't think the Constitution is really the problem here Proud Liberal Dem Oct 2013 #58

"Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you've got Waiting For Everyman Oct 2013 #59

The Constitution isn't the failure. The men who misuse it and constantly refer to it... ScreamingMeemie Oct 2013 #63

Given the overall condition of western "civilization" at the time the Constitution was ratified, Zorra Oct 2013 #64

It's not the Constitution that's the problem, it's our lawmakers ecstatic Oct 2013 #66

Parliamentary systems are usually less stable than ours. JVS Oct 2013 #67