RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment?

RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 1:44:14 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD This is much simpler than most people try to make it. So much for your desire for a strict construction. Not only on this issue but on the issue of gun control. A living document recognizes advances in weaponry from the muzzle loader to stun guns to semi auto pistols. Glad to see a dinosaur waddle into the 20th century....only another century to go. And no the Republicans would not try this, however many Dems are serious in the equally stupid attempt to disqualify Cruz, and they could be dumb enough to try this ploy if he wins. Just which demopubs have tried to disqualify cruz?

mnottertail -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 1:45:25 PM)
Cruz is not a woman, so that nutsucker theory is out the window.

thompsonx -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 1:47:02 PM)
ORIGINAL: mnottertail Cruz is not a woman, so that nutsucker theory is out the window. This may require a short-arm inspection.

Real0ne -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 3:38:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 No misogyny here. Just a question for all strict Constitutionalists out there. Article II of the Constitution outlines the powers of the President. It ONLY uses male pronouns. ("He", "His") Would a female President not be entitled to those powers sans a Constitutional Amendment? We can all rationalize on WHY the Constitution was written that way, but that doesn't answer the question. Would someone challenge it, if a woman were elected President? Keep in mind the Constitution does not say the President must be male, but rather seems to assume that it is the case. What do you think? Some may argue it depends on whether you're Supreme Court Judge who interprets the Constitution literally or as a living document. Scalia was an originalist but I think even he would struggle to interpret the Constitution as disbarring a candidate for President on the basis of gender. You also have to remember that the Constitution was written at a time when all political power was invested in male landowners. Ordinary men and women who did not possess property (and former slaves) did not possess the right to vote. Conditions have changed. Article Two of the constitution defines the qualifications of for Office: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." Since women are not disqualified by this section, it would be an uphill battle to try and convince the Supreme Court otherwise. It would also be political suicide - so the entire question is moot. the courts would simply apply the 19th amendment. the us constitution is ONLY a living document in the respect it can be amended in accord with due process of law, no other way.

thompsonx -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 3:43:49 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne the courts would simply apply the 19th amendment. the us constitution is ONLY a living document in the respect it can be amended in accord with due process of law, no other way. That is not what the heller and mcdonald decissions said. Heller and mcdonald said that stun guns (which were not invented at the time of the constitution)were arms....jesus you are phoquing stupid.

Phydeaux -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 4:43:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Real0ne the courts would simply apply the 19th amendment. the us constitution is ONLY a living document in the respect it can be amended in accord with due process of law, no other way. That is not what the heller and mcdonald decissions said. Heller and mcdonald said that stun guns (which were not invented at the time of the constitution)were arms....jesus you are phoquing stupid. Heller said not a damn thing about stun guns. Nor did heller modify the constitution.

thompsonx -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 5:50:11 PM)
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux ORIGINAL: thompsonx the courts would simply apply the 19th amendment. the us constitution is ONLY a living document in the respect it can be amended in accord with due process of law, no other way. That is not what the heller and mcdonald decissions said. Heller and mcdonald said that stun guns (which were not invented at the time of the constitution)were arms....jesus you are phoquing stupid. Heller said not a damn thing about stun guns. This from heller: The Court has held that “the Second Amendment ex- tends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,” Nor did heller modify the constitution. Just as the constitution uses the pronoun he it also speaks directly to arms. Since the arms in question were those of the time, a strict construction (as ma.tried to do unsuccessfully) would disallow stun guns. Heller says otherwise...see above. So yes, the court affirmed that the document must keep current with technology and not be limited by the actual word meaning of the period when the document was formed. Jesus, you are phoquing stupid.

BamaD -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 6:25:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Cruz is not a woman, so that nutsucker theory is out the window. He is also not ineligable to be president, except to extreme kool aid drinkers and trumpetes.

Awareness -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 10:23:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne the courts would simply apply the 19th amendment. the us constitution is ONLY a living document in the respect it can be amended in accord with due process of law, no other way. No. The effect of the constitution is determined by its application by the Supreme Court. The constitution is indeed a living document, because its interpretation is subject to change.

Real0ne -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 10:37:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne the courts would simply apply the 19th amendment. the us constitution is ONLY a living document in the respect it can be amended in accord with due process of law, no other way. No. The effect of the constitution is determined by its application by the Supreme Court. The constitution is indeed a living document, because its interpretation is subject to change. So you think one party can freely change a contract without due consideration of the other party? [8\|] I await your citation

Lucylastic -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 10:51:00 PM)
I dont think that is what he said. And on the whole isnt everyone agreeing that only a moron would attempt to say a woman cant be president and be correct??

Real0ne -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 10:57:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Real0ne the courts would simply apply the 19th amendment. the us constitution is ONLY a living document in the respect it can be amended in accord with due process of law, no other way. That is not what the heller and mcdonald decissions said. Heller and mcdonald said that stun guns (which were not invented at the time of the constitution)were arms....jesus you are phoquing stupid. Heller said not a damn thing about stun guns. Nor did heller modify the constitution. Now you did it, you quoted felch making him visible. You are 100% correct, the supreeemeeo creeeemeos did nothing more than confirm that the meaning of arms has NOT CHANGED and it means anything that can be used as a weapon today just like it meant anything that can be used as a weapon 200 years ago, from a handful of sand to a nuke. Arms are 'any weapon' past present and fuiture case in point the other thread where mass-e-choochoo passed unconstitutional legislation because like felch they cant comprehend something as simple as the meaning of arms. (which is why the annoying fucking troll is on my iggy) Anyone wants to bring out the british social contract theory and think they can 'legitimately' modify the contract or its meaning without due consideration from all parties to said contract by vote from the people is fine with me as long as we can modify the meaning of the crown holdings and treaties they signed. Watch the shit hit the fan.

Real0ne -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 10:59:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I dont think that is what he said. And on the whole isnt everyone agreeing that only a moron would attempt to say a woman cant be president and be correct?? then why did he say it?

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 11:14:34 PM)
quote: Article Two of the constitution defines the qualifications of for Office: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." Since women are not disqualified by this section, it would be an uphill battle to try and convince the Supreme Court otherwise. BINGO

Real0ne -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 11:24:01 PM)
yeh those are the qualifications BEFORE women could vote [8D]

Lucylastic -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 11:25:25 PM)
have they changed qualifications since?

Real0ne -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 11:28:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic have they changed qualifications since? no they amended the constitution. http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4893985

Lucylastic -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 11:32:26 PM)
my question was, did they amend constitution regarding the qualifications for president AFTER women got the vote?

Real0ne -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/25/2016 11:55:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic my question was, did they amend constitution regarding the qualifications for president AFTER women got the vote? the 19th, womens suffrage would carry over they did away with hereditary laws to put another layer on the onion in pretense this is not a feudal nation, with that the dowery became extinct which opened gates for the rest.

thompsonx -> RE: Can a woman be President of the United States sans a Constitutional Amendment? (3/26/2016 3:56:45 AM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne ORIGINAL: Phydeaux ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Real0ne the courts would simply apply the 19th amendment. the us constitution is ONLY a living document in the respect it can be amended in accord with due process of law, no other way. That is not what the heller and mcdonald decissions said. Heller and mcdonald said that stun guns (which were not invented at the time of the constitution)were arms....jesus you are phoquing stupid. Heller said not a damn thing about stun guns. Nor did heller modify the constitution. Now you did it, you quoted felch making him visible. As if anyone believes you have anyone on hide.[8\|] You are 100% correct, the supreeemeeo creeeemeos did nothing more than confirm that the meaning of arms They confirmed nothing. They defined the intent of the 2nd ammendment.... Jesus you are phoquing stupid. has NOT CHANGED and it means anything that can be used as a weapon today just like it meant anything that can be used as a weapon 200 years ago, from a handful of sand to a nuke. No they did not say you could have a nuke. Jeaus you are phoquing stupid.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875