Browsing through Thomas, I came across the following proposed Constitutional Amendment, cosponsored by Senators Kennedy, Murray, Cantwell, Corzine, Kerry, Lieberman, Sarbanes, Mikulski, Boxer, Lautenberg, Levin, Durbin, Schumer, Feinstein, Harkin and Dodd (all Democrats):
`SECTION 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
`SECTION 3. This article shall take effect 2 years after the date of ratification.’.
Notice, however, that with minor modifications to the first section this becomes:
Sound familiar? Granted, the wording isn’t exactly the same, but the meaning of it is very similar to an Amendment backed by our President and prominent Republicans in the Senate and elsewhere.
So there we have it. Democrats support amending the Constitution to guarantee rights. Republicans support amending the Constitution to take them away.
I agree that it is probable for the rethugs to change the wording to hate. Such a simple amendment can be turned ugly so quickly.
Having marched and fought for the ERA in the early 70’s I am not sure I’m ready for any amendment battle with the republicans in power. Right now I think I’d like to leave the constitutional amendment door closed and locked.
Be it ever so humble there’s no place like the Constitution to protect those pesky rights. How did they end up with the nomenclature right when they are anything but?
Good question!
I think it is more a matter of, uh, interpretation of – that is, it isn’t really a difference of – in other words, it’s how each pursues the same –
No, nevermind. You’re right.