Do Republicans want to reinstate the 18th Amendment?
They would like to revoke all the progressive amendments including womens rights, civil rights, secular education, free speech, search and seizure, the Miranda warnings, etc. They want to return to the 19th century. If they nominate Palin they will have the right candidate for that since she is a throwback to another era when people would "cling to their guns and religion". Ho ho ho Frank: Why is it you dont mention the other 5 states who had it on the ballot for recreational MJ? I dont know how it turned out. There are liberal pockets in every state, not just California. There are 37 million people in Calif. so everything is more noticeable. There are fundamentalist religious nut cakes just as there are Marxists, in different parts of the state. Return of Ghost: The Democrats in Congress dont like the intimate physical screenings. It is you people who are so gung ho to militarize the U.S. into a police state.
Why do liberals want to change the 1st and 2nd amendments?
Why should we change free speech to mean "don't say things that will make me feel bad?" Why should we change the 2nd amendment to "police and military only?"
Do Republicans want a theocracy?
*Sigh* I don't know why I need a source to ask a question, but here goes: http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/25/57-republicans-dismantle-constitution-christianity-national-religion.html There are many more sources if you go here:
Why is the second amendment more important to Republicans than all the other parts of the Constitution?
Seen from outside the US some of the arguments for 2nd amendment gun ownership given here and alsewhere sound extremely odd. The 18th century admonition to establish a militia to protect against the untramelled military might of the State has long been superceded by 300 years of technology.Long ago, allowing guns to fall in the hands of ordinary citizens may well have meant they could match the firepower of a standing army and deter its tyrannical use, but in the modern era, when push comes to shove, that is hardly going to be achieved by allowing the general public access to firearms. In order to deter abuse of State military power in any meaningful way you would need to allow public access to heavy weaponry/artillery - and even nuclear weapons - yet I doubt even the most rabid right-winger would seriously advocate that.It doesn’t appear to me that free access to lethal weapons has made the US any safer from political oppression and control than nations with strict gun control like my own. The main practical difference that gun ownership seems to have produced is the extraordinary rate of violent death in the US compared with other developed nations - more than three times that of the UK for example and comparable with some unstable third-world societies.The whole point of guns is that they are an efficient method of killing - I have yet to hear of a drive-by stabbing, or someone accidentally taken out by a stray pen-knife. It is therefore self-evident that the greater access you allow to handguns the greater danger of a high death rate for all citizens of the relevant society, whether the victims are criminals or law-abiding.I’m afraid I find the idea that gun control radically increases the chances of government oppression far-fetched to say the least. Saudi Arabia has one of the highest rates of private gun ownership in the world and I doubt anyone would describe that country as a beacon of human rights and freedom for the individual citizen.It does seem that the love affair of some Americans with guns shares the characteristics of any other love affair - i.e the appeal to emotion over reason.
Why would we repeal the 14th amendment to the constitution?
In the current political scene, the reasoning behind the repeal or amendment of the 14th amendment is one of illegal immigrants and the "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." part of section 1. It states that if an illegal immigrant were to cross the border and give birth, the baby is an American citizen. This is why some people want the amendment repealed or amended. Personally, I'd like to see the citizenship part of the 14th amendment repealed, and not for illegal immigration reasons. Before the amendment was passed, people were citizens of their state, which gave the states more power than the federal government in most things, unless that power was specifically given to the federal government by the Constitution. After the 14th amendment, all state citizens became federal citizens first, state citizens second. This gave enormous power to the federal government, which is why they can now threaten any state with all sorts of things - mostly economic. It's also why there are federal laws out there that apply to each person, even when the power to make those laws doesn't exist in the Constitution.
Who are the most out of touch, Republicans or Democrats?
Most definitely the democrats are out of touch. They proved it in the 2016 elections. They were totally FLOORED that Hillary lost. And she lost because she catered to the elite rather than to the average Americans ( who she labeled DEPLORABLES).The democrats pushed identity politics onto folks who’ve lost jobs and were just trying to survive. But rather than emphasize with them, she looked down her nose and called them DEPLORABLES.And they still don’t understand why she lost. Why not only Hillary but 1,000 other elected seats around the country, including many governorships.Hillary is a snob, and it shows. She has no regard for anyone who’s not from the big cities and coastal areas. She caters to the Hollywood celebs and the big money on Wall Street.And yet, the democrats are still pushing their agenda that nobody wants. They will spit down upon the DEPLORABLES again, and yet again, they will lose.The democrats used to be the party of the blue collar worker. The mom and pop businesses, the average Joe who carries his lunch pail to work. Instead they now cater to Madonna, Mariah Carey, GEORGE Clooney, Angelina Jolie’s, etc.Nobody cares about what these rich snobbish celebrities think as they surround themselves with guards carrying guns while they deny the average American the right to own weapons for their own protection.The democrats won’t change and they’ll lose again. And again. And again.
What exactly do Democrats and Republicans believe in?
If you want to know about the political spectrum and what people believe in the party lines, check out this link: http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Sp... In the most simplified way, here is my take: Democrats are often humanitarians, and believers in government intervention to ensure equality. They are strongly behind the ethical structure of government. Republicans are often opportunists, "survival of the fittest" and they believe the government that governs best, governs the least. They are strongly behind the moral structure of government. It is not wise of any voter to just pick and party and fall in line. Each individual should look at their own values, and pick a candidate that reflects them the best. Many candidates share both liberal and conservative values. Don't mind the foolish posters who let garbage flow from their mouths, these are just silly on line boards that hold no weight in real politics, and the chance that any of the extremists will sway you is slim to none. You know your personal values, stick to em!