Constitutional Amendments I’d Like to See

I believe in the Constitution of the United States. I don’t think it’s outdated, but I think it could use some additions and clarifications.

Fortunately, the Constitution’s framers provided a means for the States not simply to suggest further amendments, but to make them. Gathering a Convention of States for that purpose is a long, tedious process, but a large number of concerned citizens are attempting to do that now.

I haven’t paid as much attention to their news as I might have done, but I believe their proposed amendments are good and necessary. I’m not going to talk about their proposed amendments as such, even though some of mine overlap with theirs.

Let’s start with a requirement that Congress pass a balanced budget every year. We’ve all heard horrendous stories about the way the Federal government wastes money. And I believe billions of dollars are spent by the Federal government on areas the Constitution doesn’t give it the authority to be involved in. Many of them–education, for example–should be strictly within the hands of the States.

Oh, and let’s set term limits–the total number of years–senators and congressmen can serve in public office. No one should be permitted to make a career of staying in office. That’s probably a big factor in why the swamp in Washington needs to be drained. And why it’s so difficult to do.

And what about those Supreme Court justices who have more power than Congress, even though the framers of the Constitution intended for the judicial branch of the government to be the weakest branch? And it’s almost impossible to remove a justice. Their power needs to be limited, and perhaps they should be given term limits as well.

I don’t know whether they should be elected, but it’s a thought. Of course, if their power was properly limited, that probably wouldn’t be as much of an issue.

I don’t have an answer for the immigration problem, but if I were someone who’d worked hard to gain legal entry into the United States and did so because I loved what America stands for and studied and and passed the test to become an American citizen,  I would be highly upset at the influx of illegals, many of whom don’t want to blend in with the rest of us.  Maybe we can’t force them to change their attitudes, but the Constitution could  be amended to make English the official–the ONLY official language–of America.

I’m not out to make people forget their former cultures, just to make English-speaking Americans out of them. And not bow down to their anti-American attitudes while enjoying America’s privileges.

And while I’m at it, how about an amendment clarifying that the First Amendment doesn’t outlaw religion in government? It only says that the government can’t establish a state religion.

Hmm. I thought I was done, but one more thought has come to mind. Maybe the Constitution can’t be amended simply to outlaw political correctness, but how about an amendment clarifying that what a person says isn’t illegal simply because someone else doesn’t want to hear it? Is it possible to even legislate offensiveness without that legislation itself being offensive?

I think that’s it. But what about you? Do you have other amendments you’d like to see? Or do you disagree with any of mine? Comments are welcome as long as they’re made respectfully.

I’ll be back again next Sunday. If you’d like to receive my posts by email, go to “Follow Blog via Email” at the upper right.

Best regards,


Links you might be interested in:

The Freedom of Religion

While searching for something else this morning, I ran across my little pocket-sized copy of The Constitution of the United States. I brought it back to my recliner and started looking through it. I’d forgotten how dry and detailed some of it is. My hat is off to anyone specializing in the study of Constitutional law.

This small booklet opens naturally to the very middle, which is where the Amendments to the Constitution begin. As I hope most of you already know, the first ten are the Bill of Rights.

After reading some of the dry detailed other parts of the Constitution, the first amendment  was wonderfully straight forward:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peacefully to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What too many people don’t realize is that the statement regarding freedom of religion was included for a very specific reason. Several of the colonies had a state-dictated religion. The founders of my church, Winn’s Baptist Church, had been beaten or jailed during colonial days for preaching illegally here in Virginia, where only the Anglican Church was recognized and tolerated.

So the framers of the Bill of Rights were making certain that Congress would not be guilty of establishing a state church the way England had done with the Anglican church. And Congress wouldn’t prevent people from worshiping freely at their choice of churches.

Did you notice the key word in that amendment? Congress. The Constitution of the United States doesn’t say anything about protecting people from religion, a concept that has become a real thorn in the side of this country and of the various states. Neither does it prohibit the practice of religion, even in government meetings or schools. It certainly doesn’t forbid the display of nativity sets in public places or the placement of the Ten Commandments (upon which all law is based) in courtrooms or anywhere else.

Yet our First Amendment rights are under attack daily. How can that happen when the meaning of the First Amendment is so clear?

The Supreme Court is largely to blame, although Congress and “We the People” have allowed the Court to do it. The Constitution originally contained 4,543 words, including the signature of the signers. The addition of the amendments brings the total to 7,591. Decisions made by the Supreme Court have expanded its interpreted meaning to many hundreds of pages.

The Harvard Law Review published a scary article called “The Constitution Means What the Supreme Court Says It Means.” And too many Supreme Court Justices openly ignore the text of the Constitution and apply their own biases to create meanings that are completely contrary to the Constitution. When liberal justices are in the majority, that happens more and more.

Several months ago I wrote that the most important reason for Americans to vote in the November election was to select a president who would appoint only conservative justices who are committed to upholding the Constitution. The president-elect has promised to do that. Appointing a conservative to the bench will result in a conservative majority–one we can count on to uphold the Constitution and make decisions based on it.

I pray daily that God will enable that to happen.

This is a controversial subject, but your comments are welcome.

NOTE: Various people have complained about not being able to find or leave comments. Go all the way to the bottom of this post, beneath my “Best regards, Roger.” On the very bottom line of that last section just above the previous post you’ll see “Leave a Comment” if yours will be the first or “X Comments,” where  X denotes the number of existing comments.


Links you might be interested in:

I’ll be back again on Sunday. If you’d like to receive my posts by email, go to “Follow Blog via Email” at the upper right.

Best regards,