Convention of States

User Tools

Site Tools

You are here: index » documents » answers » answering_the_john_birch_society_questions_about_article_v_jbsqa
documents:answers:answering_the_john_birch_society_questions_about_article_v_jbsqa

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
documents:answers:jbsqa [2015/12/29 19:14] – Oliver Wolcottdocuments:answers:answering_the_john_birch_society_questions_about_article_v_jbsqa [2019/02/08 22:12] – Oliver Wolcott
Line 3: Line 3:
 </WRAP> </WRAP>
 ====== Answering the John Birch Society Questions about Article V ====== ====== Answering the John Birch Society Questions about Article V ======
 +{{page>:socials}}
 [[http://www.conventionofstates.com/answers_to_john_birch_society|(Source)]] [[http://www.conventionofstates.com/answers_to_john_birch_society|(Source)]]
 {{tag>JBS What_problem Congress_role Delegates Proposing Ratification Who_dominates? Supreme_Court State_Power 10th_Amendment ERA 16th_Amendment 17th_Amendment New_Consititution }} {{tag>JBS What_problem Congress_role Delegates Proposing Ratification Who_dominates? Supreme_Court State_Power 10th_Amendment ERA 16th_Amendment 17th_Amendment New_Consititution }}
Line 8: Line 9:
  
 **Michael Farris, JD, LLM** **Michael Farris, JD, LLM**
-[[documents:answers:jbsqa:#farris|(Bio)]]+[[#farris|(Bio)]]
  
 The John Birch Society describes itself as a constitutionalist organization, yet it is highly critical of a very important component of the Constitution. The JBS does not like Article V's provision that allows the States to unilaterally propose and ratify amendments to the Constitution. The John Birch Society describes itself as a constitutionalist organization, yet it is highly critical of a very important component of the Constitution. The JBS does not like Article V's provision that allows the States to unilaterally propose and ratify amendments to the Constitution.
Line 174: Line 175:
 **If we aren't following the Constitution now, would it be logical to assume that once we pass amendments to the Constitution, then the new amendments and the Constitution will be followed?** **If we aren't following the Constitution now, would it be logical to assume that once we pass amendments to the Constitution, then the new amendments and the Constitution will be followed?**
  
-We agree completely with the sentiment that, on the whole, our country is not following the original meaning of the Constitution. However, there are certain subjects where the Constitution has been interpreted accurately in light of original intent. For example, the Second Amendment has been on good footing lately. The Full +We agree completely with the sentiment that, on the whole, our country is not following the original meaning of the Constitution. However, there are certain subjects where the Constitution has been interpreted accurately in light of original intent. For example, the Second Amendment has been on good footing lately. The Full Faith and Credit Clause is functioning well. Term limits on the President are being obeyed.
- +
-<sup>2</sup> Even if Congress chooses State ratification conventions as the method for ratification, the State legislatures choose the method of selecting the delegates for such conventions. If the States believe that the process has been abused, they will surely choose a method for naming the delegates that will follow their desires. For example, nothing would stop a State from saying that the ratifying convention would be composed of delegates appointed by each member of the house and senate, with each representative getting to choose one delegate. +
- +
-Faith and Credit Clause is functioning well. Term limits on the President are being obeyed.+
  
 The core answer to this question relates back to the answer to the first question. Our government is operating in substantial compliance with the Constitution //as interpreted by the Supreme// //Court. //Thus, the government has a plausible claim that it is// //currently obeying the Constitution. The core answer to this question relates back to the answer to the first question. Our government is operating in substantial compliance with the Constitution //as interpreted by the Supreme// //Court. //Thus, the government has a plausible claim that it is// //currently obeying the Constitution.
Line 358: Line 355:
 [[https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/conventionofstates/pages/145/attachments/original/1410015960/Answers-to-JBS-arguments_Long-Version.pdf?1410015960|Click here to download a PDF]] of this document. [[https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/conventionofstates/pages/145/attachments/original/1410015960/Answers-to-JBS-arguments_Long-Version.pdf?1410015960|Click here to download a PDF]] of this document.
 ---- ----
 +-----------------
 +{{page>:wiki_footer}}
 +------------------
 ===== End notes ===== ===== End notes =====
  
Line 378: Line 378:
  
 //Farris has been awarded the Salvatori Prize for American Citizenship by the Heritage Foundation, a Lifetime Achievement Award by The Family Foundation of Virginia, and was named one of the Top 100 Faces in Education of the 20//<sup>//th//</sup>// Century by Education Week magazine.// //Farris has been awarded the Salvatori Prize for American Citizenship by the Heritage Foundation, a Lifetime Achievement Award by The Family Foundation of Virginia, and was named one of the Top 100 Faces in Education of the 20//<sup>//th//</sup>// Century by Education Week magazine.//
 +
 +
  
documents/answers/answering_the_john_birch_society_questions_about_article_v_jbsqa.txt · Last modified: 2021/02/28 12:10 by Oliver Wolcott