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: <STANTON.91Apr19151248@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <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?





