Questions based on a plain and simple reading of the US Constitution

You can say it all you want but it isn't true. In fact the opposite is true.Can you state any court case that affirms what you claim?

It burns. The preamble just outlines who is the authority behind the Constitution are the authority. The people who wrote the Constitution and the people that were the authority were not citizens of the USA.The preamble says nothing about who ahs rights or what they are. All it does explain the purpose and the authority behind it.The United States referenced in your highlight is not the United States of America. You are equivocating. It could not be because the political entity USA did not exist yet. What it referred to is the people of the individual states united together.

Just because he says so and you agree does not make it true. How about you present some kind of legal support for this argument. Or better yet actually address the argument I made. Show me how my points are wrong or my argument is fallacious.

So short a post, so many issues. Moving goal posts, strawman arguments. Utter dishonesty in debating.How about you try addressing what I actually said not what you invented.Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

You do realize people can actually read my post and know it does not imply anything of the sort. Argue against what I actually posted not some bs you invent.
Quit lying please.

Who are these scholars? Please show some of their arguments. The reasoning behind that one statement is stupendously ignorant. Where in the Constitution does it say just the first 10 amendments are important? You do realize the founders put in a specific procedure to amend the Constitution. What free stuff? If you were not so blinded by hate you would do actual research and see that immigrants actually pay more in taxes than they take out in benefits. Non documented immigrants even more so. They are actually subsidizing your lifestyle.Edited by Theodoric, : Founders spelling

Like the white skinhead gangs, Aryan brotherhood, Peckerwoods, russian mobs?Your post is an amazing racist rant.The vast majority of immigrants are law abiding. The vast majority of undocumented immigrants are law abiding. They want to and need to stay under the radar.

Why did you choose Hispanic gangs if you were not making a racist comment? Why are they worse than white gangs?Your racism is showing and it is not pretty. I know hundreds of Hispanics. 99.9% are citizens or in the US legally. Only two that I know are associated with gangs.
I know at least 5 that are in law enforcement, 3 lawyers, 1 judge. So tell me how Hispanics are less law abiding than whites.

The utter inanity of this remark form marc9000 is stunning If this were true the whole political process we have to day would be illegitimate.
Article 5 clearly states a process for amending the Constitution

quote:

---

The Congress, whenever twothirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of twothirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of threefourths of the several States, or by Conventions in threefourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

---

That the first 10 are ok but rest are not is just ridiculous and actually a treasonous assertion.Lets look at some of these amendments him and his "conservative scholars"(Be interesting if he actual provides any, could be a laugh) think are not legitimate. Our whole political process would be illegitimate.
Hillary Clinton would be Vice President. None of the Elections since 1804 would be legitimate. This was a very good amendment.Slavery. Enough said.No voting for black people or women. Really?No income tax. So there would be almost zero funding for the government, state or federal. That means no military, not border security at all. The old ways of funding, tariffs primarily, were no longer feasible by the 20th century.The people would not have a direct vote on Senators. Lets think of all the reasons that is bad.Obama could have run for a third term. Probably would have won.Poll taxes. Enough said.This is not all of them but most. The stupidity of the comment stands on its own. Love to read what his "scholars" have to say.Here is the Constitution in all its glory and beauty. I try to read it at least once a year. Everyone that is a US citizen should read it and ponder its meanings.
The Constitution of the United States

No it wouldn't. Most hispanic gangs are not made up of undocumented immigrants. Gangs prey on the undocumented. Why do you think a Hispanic gang would be undocumented immigrants, but white gangs are ok?
The vast majority of Hispanics are not immigrants at all. Many have been here for as many generations as most white families. As a matter of fact most were here before the places they live in were even part of the USA. There have been Hispanic families in the southwest and Florida for 450 years. Much longer than any white family has been here.Faith I call you a racist because you are. You equate illegal with Hispanic, that is racist.I know your context and I call out your racist remarks.

I guess I win.Maybe you need to cool off for a few days. Why don't you go on some bible retreat so you can cool down.

Are you now claiming that the peaceful protesters in the picture had killed cops before this? That is beyond the pale even for you. Crawl back in your hole.

Therefore we should condemn Donnie for any violence done in support of his policies an rhetoric.Cool. Glad to see you will condemning racism.

So you hold BLM to a higher standard than Donnie Trump?Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

Then why do you hold BLM responsible for all black on white violence or for anyone claims they are speaking for BLM or all violence toward police?Isn't that a higher standard? If not explain why.