Article V of the U.S. Constitution.

[xd9fan]

Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.



http://www.mikechurch.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4348:the-article-v-conventions-time-has-come&catid=982:todays-lead-story&Itemid=300062

Article V for Vendetta!!!!

http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/political-view/147923-article-v-u-s-constitution.html

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Who needs Article V when we got election in November:


YouTube - Health Care and Violence (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N69g5xoZCoI&)

[nobody's_hero]

Don't let FrankRep or LE see this thread. ;)

[Southron]

I support an Article V convention.

I don't think there is much hope in fixing our problems in any small number of election cycles.

[FrankRep]

Don't let FrankRep or LE see this thread. ;)

Mike Church is playing with fire with an Article with people like Nancy Pelosi in office. There is no way to be certain real Constitutionalists will be proposing the changes. We may get an ObamaCare-style Constitution.

[cpike]

There are only two changes I want. Getting rid of the IRS and having Senators being elected by the state legislatures again. Other than that the constitution is fine, and I don't think we need a whole new convention. What they are doing is ILLEGAL, but they do it anyways. We don't need a new constitution we just need to start enforcing the one we have.

[fisharmor]

I don't know, I think I'd also like an amendment declaring fractional reserve banking to be fraudulent, and also maybe a ctrl-c ctrl-v of the English definition of the word "among" would be nice, too.

[Stary Hickory]

We need only one amendment out of a Con Con.

The states have final authority on what is and what it not constitutional, and State law is > Federal Law.

This is what I want. Just this one amendment. The rest can take care of itself.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.



http://www.mikechurch.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4348:the-article-v-conventions-time-has-come&catid=982:todays-lead-story&Itemid=300062

Article V for Vendetta!!!!

http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/political-view/147923-article-v-u-s-constitution.html

Forget about the interpretation of legal precedence. Have you noticed how some of the terms have been formalized in the higher case using Plato's theory of "best principle" just as the same method was also used in The Declaration of Independence? It was our Founding Fathers intentions to break away from such legal precedence establishing for the people instead a new nation and Civil Purpose based on the Truth.
While lawyers pretend that The Declaration of Independence has no legal precedence, the intentions of our Founding Fathers wasn't to establish traditional legal precedence as they perceived this to be the false power of tyranny: but, they perceived in their consciences the Truth as the true power.
As the Lord's New Covenant now supercedes the law of the Ten Commandments, in fellowship, our Founding Fathers as awakening Christian brothers during the renaissance of Christ declared that the Civil Purpose of the people supercedes all legal precedence, every past tradition, and every future event yet to occur.