Skip to main content

View Diary: Cartoon: Quiz time: First Amendment (45 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Time to amend the Constitution (20+ / 0-)

    Wolf PAC

    The social contract is broken. The new aristocrats pried it away from us. Time to take it back.

    Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

    by Simplify on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 07:12:07 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Amending the Constitution will not help, and any (5+ / 0-)

      attempt to amend the Constitution may very well end up without any Bill of Rights except for corporations and the religiously pious.  A Handmaiden's tale brought to life.  The  pols doing these things were elected by a majority of voters, and the judges doing these things were appointed by the pols who were elected by the voters.
          In the present situation, at least the words are still there, and there is a jurisprudence, ignored as of late but still there, that can be called upon to protect us from the Imperialists and fundies.

      Patriotism may be the last refuge of scoundrels, but religion is assuredly the first.

      by StrayCat on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 07:37:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's thinking we have something to lose (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Darwinian Detritus, kittie, lilyf, dalef77

        that we don't actually have. A bird in the hand would be worth more than two in the bush... except that we don't have a bird in the hand, per the cartoon.

        The words have little effect, so don't change them?
        Supposed rights are subject to the whims of the majority?
        We can't be trusted to enact our own social contract, even with a massive supermajority required for its ratification?

        That's giving up on self-determination in a democracy.

        The process of drafting and passing an amendment is the civic engagement that makes the words have effect. And better an Article V convention than leaving it to the already bought Congress—it'll get the public involved.

        Leaving the enactment of our rights to people long dead and gone is part of what got us in this situation in the first place. Renewing our democracy is keeping it.

        Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

        by Simplify on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 07:57:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re-reading this, I'm tilting more... (6+ / 0-)

          toward your side. The ability to buy politicians is the single biggest impediment to this country doing the right thing on pretty much any front. Is congress going to fix that? How can they? They're already beholden to their sponsors.

          The bill of rights is in no danger so long as we're focused on a new amendment rather than "fixing" the First (which is fine as-is, it's ludicrous interpretations by the judicial enablers of the plutcrats and theocrats that's causing the problems).

          One good thing about music, when it hits you feel no pain -Bob Marley

          by Darwinian Detritus on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 08:29:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Democrats crushed occupy ,1st amendment (0+ / 0-)

            Jean Quan in Oakland hates occupy. Tom Bates in Berkeley hates occupy. Their right wing g cops hate occupy even more. Together, with Obama's support they crushed free speech against the rich men who rule earth.

            More Fear, More Profit. Its Math.

            by Pattern Math on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 09:37:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Really? (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Tamar, kittie, WakeUpNeo, snwflk, smartalek

              I guess you must know about the super secret meeting that President Obama holds will all the Democratic mayors to give them marching orders...

              In all seriousness, the idea that Obama has anything to do with what either Jean Quan or Tom Bates does is pretty ludicrous.  And to suggest that he's responsible for Supreme Court decisions that have equated money as speech and given religious conscience to corporations is even more ludicrous, considering that Obama's appointees were in the dissenting minority on both decisions.

              If Democrats proclaim the the Earth is round and Republicans insist it is flat, we will shortly see a column in the Washington Post claiming the the earth is really a semi-circle.

              by TexasTom on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 12:28:28 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I agree. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        smartalek, POLOPAULA, bethann, snwflk

        There's basically no defense against doublespeak and doublethink.  The Constitution can say the sun rises in the East, and the SCOTUS could say "It's all in how you look at it."  The corporate view will always win, until we change the cast of characters, at which point the Constitution as it was originally written will be just fine.

    •  SCOTUS is problem, not bill of rights. Vital to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      POLOPAULA

      keep Dems in WH and have them nominate decent youthful  moderates or progressives to SCOTUS.  

    •  the social contract (0+ / 0-)

      theory to explain the origin of social (governmental) authority never seemed like quite an adaquate justification for allowing government (society) to advance its needs at the expense of the individuals rights.
      A little more palatable (perhaps less honest) than the "authority from the mouth of a gun" model; but it never set well with me-
      when a group can disrupt the rights of an individual, that power must be carefully constrained- let's face it that hasn't continued to be the case.
      The constitution was designed to protect the rights of individuals, recognizing that groups of any kind accrue  power to trample people. Given the "lifespan" of organizations such as corporations, governments and churchs, that power can become almost irresistable.
      When society is given the power to infringe on the rights of the individual (eminent domain etc), they will eventually belive they have a right to do so- this is not true- they never have the right to do so- there may be times when society must encroach on the rights of the individual, but it is always an infringement, a necessary evil does not become good, just because it is neccesary.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site