Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!ptownson From: ptownson@eecs.nwu.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Subject: Re: Amendments Message-ID: <1991Apr28.061119.18402@eecs.nwu.edu> Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University References: <4364.2816d635@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> <1991Apr26.141044.7544@alphalpha.com> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1991 06:11:19 GMT In article <1991Apr26.141044.7544@alphalpha.com> nazgul@alphalpha.com (Kee Hinckley) writes: > In article <4364.2816d635@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> herrickd@iccgcc. > decnet.ab.com writes: >> The other is to get three-quarters of the state legislatures to >> petition Congress to call a Constitutional Convention, at which >> time Congress has no option but to call the convention. > It should be noted that this option is avoided like the plague, since > once a CC is convened it's open season on the Constitution and *anything* > can be changed. No, it should *really* be noted that this option is only avoided like the plague by lawyers, ACLU-types, and other stupid liberals who want to save us from ourselves ... Good heavens! The idea of the unwashed masses of the American public having any actual say-so in how they are governed? I think a CC would be a great idea, with real people -- not politicians, not lawyers, not Alan Dershowitz, not ACLU'ers -- actually deciding their fate for a change. Understandably, a couple of law school professors might grow nauseous and faint if it happened ... Just listen to some of the lame excuses you will hear everytime someone suggests a CC ... 'it would be a run-away convention' ... it would be a 'single issue convention' ... 'some people would try to impose their own standards of morality into it' ... I wish you would recall that it is supposed to be 'we the people' who do the governing, make the laws and decide how things are done ... why aren't we allowed to do it any longer?