Would you amend the Constitution to save our Constitutional rights?

Why assume that 0.8% of the population has an average of 6 children when the Pew Research Center as hard numbers. Here is what they have to say:

"From 1990 to 2000, the Muslim population grew at an average annual rate of 2.3%. The growth rate dipped to 2.1% from 2000 to 2010, and it is projected to drop to 1.7% from 2010 to 2020 and 1.4% from 2020 to 2030"

 

Instead of assuming, you should try to get actual numbers. It may surprise you.

 

So do you believe that one can only gain a right at the expense of someone else's right?

 

My Dad taught the subject in a law school. I don't think I will be looking for any answers on an internet site full of anonymity. And no I am not interested in convention or a rewrite. Too dangerous and unpredictable.

 

Not even interested in stopping a re write possibly planned for twenty years?

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...nstitutional-threat-thread-real-defenses.html

 

what a line of horse (*)(*)(*)(*). It ways it right there. Muslims are murdering thousands across the globe, all in the name of allah, and here you are defending them. You said I had to produce, but it would appear that even if I got mohammed to stand up and say it, you'd find him to be a liar.
Screw islam and all the muslims.

 

see? You have become so steeped in the pig troughs of muslim love, you denounce all and everything.
My Rights end where another's begins. However, YOUR Rights end when mine begin. How is any of those taking Rights away from you or you mudslime buddies?

 

I agree, if we both use our right to free speech at the same time, it is not going to work. So we share the right.

But, can you agree the right to free speech has an ultimate purpose?

 

and, when the 0.8% group finally DOES become the majority, they get to amend the constitution any way they want to as long as they follow the rules in the constitution.

duh.

 

sure we can. I can talk while you're talking. It doesn't violate your rights one bit.
You can tell me to shut up, and I can exercise my Right to tell you to shut up. IF neither one shuts up, what's the loss
However, you cannot quiet me. IF that offends you, too bad.
I like the Bill of Rights quite where it is. If the government followed the rules in that document, you and I wouldn't be having this dear little chat.
the most important Right is the Right to keep and bear arms. Without it, you cannot maintain your other Rights. Think about it.
People have to make choices. Rights or privileges......the only two choices

 

What does that have to do with changing our Constitution? Please provide proof that Muslims in America are trying to force Sharia law into our government and courts. So far you have proven nothing except that you have allowed fear replace logic.

 

I'm a bit confused. I thought this conversation is about how you think that every time we add an amendment, it takes away someone else's right. How did we get to calling my friends mudslime? You don't even know any of my friends.

 

That's not a question I considered before. Is it possible to be owed something, without someone else owing it to you? Maybe.




​

 

You can plug in any numbers that you want. How many babies does the average American Muslim woman have? I was just guessing that it was 6.

How many babies does the average American born woman have? Just give me the accurate numbers then I will recalculate. No big deal. Just let me know.

- - - Updated - - -

No problem. Just give me the accurate numbers and I will recalculate.

 

in the beginning, there were but a few.
I have demonstrated how Texas, of all states, has allowed an Islam Tribunal to be established. In Sweden, it has become law that you cannot disrespect Allah. Severest of penalties.
England, cloistering muslim communities. Same here.
Let's put it to you in terms even you can understand. You come to America for one of two reasons. You've either come to be an American, or not. You want Shariah Law, or even the threat of it, move to a country that is founded on this so-called religion of peace. Start at Yemen and work your way in any direction and you'll see what they leave behind. And yet, in spite of all their current bloody history, you say they pose no threat to the US.
IMO, anyone that would say that is either young and ignorant, atheist, or muslim.

 

Speaking of Texas, does anybody know the history of Texas and how it was stolen from Mexico?

Mexico had an extremely liberal immigration policy that invited Americans to settle the land in droves in the North Mexican territory known as Texas. Eventually the Americans out numbered the Mexicans, declared their independence and kicked Mexico's backside and forced them to move further south. Later on after the Civil War, Texas joined the United States.

This is a history lesson that has been repeated all over the world. Military might has nothing on population dominance. All major empires crumble from within. This isn't far fetched fairy tales. It also isn't far fetched horror movies either.

When a people become the majority then it alters the political system regardless of the type of government that previously held dominance in that geographic locale.

 

P.K., you are one of my favorite posters, however, this thread would have been a lot better if it had really just been about constitutional rights.
After reading the thread title, I was disappointed when I clicked on it and found it was about muslims.

To answer your thread question, maybe add an extra amendment to help strengthen and protect free speech, just to absolutely clarify that even "offensive speech" against religion is still protected.

 

I can do one better. Below are some charts provided by Pew Research Center on the population growth of Muslims in America.



As you can see, it is projected that in the 20 year time span from 2010 to 2030, the Muslim population will raise 0.9 percentage points. If that rate stays the same (and actually, Muslim population growth rates are falling), it would take over 800 years for Muslims to reach majority in the U.S.

Of course, that doesn't take into account the Hispanic population, which is raising at 10 percentage points every 20 years. Considering that most Hispanics are not Muslim, it is going to be hard for the Muslim population to over take the Hispanic population any time soon.

 

Have you read the Constitution??? If you have then you would not have posted this.

 

Hmmm, I said it doesn't work. It's not functional if we talk at the same time.

Speech has a purpose, a function. Communication. It also has an ultimate purpose which can be inferred logically under the American constitution as being to enable the creation of unity needed to alter or abolish government destructive to our rights.

Can you agree with and accept that?

As far as the second amendment, well it's second for a reason. If we were independent and didn't need supermarkets, maybe arms could be used to defend rights. Currently, all the gov has got to do is trash the economy, and three days later we're in deep poo poo.

They don't even need to show up.

Now if you could get every gun owner to show up armed and loaded at the same time at key points and take over, that would work. But that pre supposing you can do that which you can't.

That's unity. If we could do that, we wouldn't need the guns.

 

It sounds good, but whoever's in power can still cavort, twist, and stretch the meaning of the words, if not worded very carefully.

 

If we fail to define constitutional intent, yes. However, if we unify and agree upon definitions for prime constitutional intents, and use the law of Article V, the codified right to alter or abolish, the we become "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts".

Here is a strategy that makes us the masters, state by state.

A) Test officials and candidates for acceptance of the root purpose of free speech being to assure unity vital to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights is shared and understood.

B) Test officials and candidates for acceptance of purpose of free speech as prime constitutional intent used to enforce "alter or abolish" as the prime right for the purpose of protecting unalienable rights.

C) Assure officials of government, accept that EVERY American can understand and accept A) and B) is needed.

D) Are you aware that in 1911, 2/3 of the states applied for a convention and congress violated the law, their oath and the constitution by failing to convene delegates?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs7qIQ1VkEg
http://my.firedoglake.com/danielmarks/2013/04/30/congress-needs-to-comply-with-state-demands-for-article-v-constitutional-convention/

Letter from the Clerk of congress denying congress must count applications for Article V.

http://articlev.org/oxwall/ow_userfiles/plugins/groupfiles/clerk-reply.pdf

Can you accept that such a fact justifies that all delegates be elected in the states by the people of those states?

E) Can you understand and accept that any state legislator that cannot accept A), can be impeached in this constitutional emergency as being unfit for office?

F)Can you understand and accept that A) B) C) D) & E) are legal process and that IF citizens act with D) as justification, and E) to complete the legal process, they WILL be "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" BECAUSE their states, as led by the people, then will agree that proper preparation for Article V consists of;

1) Amend Article V to assure the right to "alter or abolish" is enforceable under law with the peoples unity, by including preparatory amendment as a requirement.

2) End the abridging of free speech.

3) Securing the vote.

4) Campaign finance reform.

G) Officials of states and federal government need to accept that such preparation by amendment is completely constitutional and can only enable democratic assertion of the principles of the republic once complete; WHEREUPON all amendment ceases until America can assure it is competent to Article V by testing itself to assure it knows and can define constitutional intent

 

you have too many "what if's" to make it work in a dream world, much less in reality

 

those that are not prepared to exist without government deserve what they get. You may run out of food and water, I won't.....
This is what happens when you depend on government for anything. You find yourself lacking.

 

So trade one (*)(*)(*)(*)ty draconian religion for another one! Great. You do know that Christianity is a foreign religion