Outlawing Abortion: The Office of the President and the Legislative Process.
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
No, no and no.
I believe that we have been close.
I do not know what it is that you do not know. The question is likely now how to do this.
I told you how. By making it illegal.
Not saying you wouldn't be a good leader, but we wouldn't be able to accomplish much if you were president.
If you were the king, however, that's a different story entirely.
My understanding is that we have no King in the United States of America. What can the President do, including the legislative process? Presidents can accomplish a lot.
Yes. Not the declaring of abortion to be illegal, but actually making it illegal. What can the President do alone? How can the legislative process work? This is not a judge interpreting preexisting law, except God's Law, the Torah. This alone would be worth the effort and becoming President. I thank you for implying that I may make a good leader.
Correct.
In an ideal world, though, America would not have a president, congress, House of Rep., or Senate. She would have a King.
Not really.
Not very much.
I encourage you to go have a look at my "Advocation of Government" thread.
Certainly a better leader than the current government could ever provide.
Maybe you can provide a link to your thread? I looked through two pages of threads in Politics.
Why a King?
What about legislation?
We have a Constitution to defend.
Just use the search box to look for: "An Advocation of Government"
Well, for starters, Monarchy is the purest form of government. A single point of accountability often rightly motivates.
For what? Excluding the criminal code and the constitution, the King would be the one to implement, amend, and revoke laws pertaining to infrastructure use and zoning. No amendments to the Constitution (not the one we have currently, but a new one) and the Criminal Code would be permitted. The Monarch alone would be allowed to amend only America’s Code of Use.
Our constitution is unconstitutional.
Read Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation.
Okay. Much easier with a computer.
Interesting. Are you a Citizen of the United States of America? I am.
Interesting to see an the Articles of Confederation.
What do you believe makes the Constitution unconstitutional? Do you believe that it contradicts itself? In what way are you wanting to say that it is unconstitutional?
I understand that the Constitutional Monarchy idea is not your idea.
Yes, I am.
It is in violation of Article 13 of the AoC, which were the original government documents in the USA.
Right.
Okay. Can you defend the Constitution?
How so?
I understand that you are an adult. You were 23 two years ago so are you 25 now?
drbrumley
Well-known member
Only if it's Jesus ....
I need to get back to this thread...I have a post that needs an answer from me.
Kit the Coyote
New member
Since the current Constitution was agreed to by a Congress of the United States and afterward confirmed by the legislatures of every state, I'm not sure how you base this argument.
A monarchy is not a theocracy, Doc.
I said king. Not God.
Can't wait to hear it!
| Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State. |
The Constitution is not an alteration to the Articles of Confederation, it's a completely different document. And we don't even abide by the Articles anymore, even though it was a perpetual document that every State was to follow.
The Articles were signed in 1781. The Constitution wasn't signed until SIX YEARS LATER, in 1787.
That is how the constitution is unconstitutional, in that it is a new document made in direct violation (approving of something that violates the law makes one a criminal by association) of the 13th Article, which described the Articles as being a perpetual document. (Interestingly enough... The number 13 in the Bible signifies rebellion. :think: But that's neither here nor there... :idunno
Can I? Kind of. Will I? No.
See my above post.
What does my age have to do with anything?
It doesn't matter then. I noted that you said 23 in your thread. I think that there is something at 20 and at 25 on the Jewish calendar. Just interesting that you may be 25.