Post
by alternatefutures » Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:52 pm
First, my system allows for change, just 3/4ths of the states must agree, as it is supposed to work now. Court opinions do not have the power to change the Constitution.
The Third Reich allowed members of the Nazi party to hold office, and durring the entirty of the 20th Century both the Republican and the Democratic parties had many members of their parties in office. Read; "banned all people belonging to ANY", not "banned all people belonging to SOME".
And members would still have the right to express themselves, they just cannot associate with a political party. As this would be outlined in the Constitution, such a ban cannot be unconstitutional. And the right to free speech is not a part of our Constitution. The First Amendment begins "Congress shall make no law". Both the terms "Congress" and "Law" are clearly defined in Article I of the US Constitution. The fact that the framers of the Bill of Rights choose such specific language instead of simply writing "Government" cannot be ignored. The First Amendment grants no rights as it is a direction to Congress, and as such the Supremacy Clause in the Fourteenth cannot be applied to it. The Fourth Amendment, on the other hand, which begins with "The right of the people," DOES grant rights. Under the First Amendment, the power for regulating speech and religion falls to the States. Nowhere in the US Constitution is freedom of speech called a "right". Feel free to read it if you do not believe me.
Limiting the rights of elected officials is a good thing as officials have proven they cannot be trusted.