Difference between revisions of "Coalition letter against Convention of States"

From Phyllis Schlafly Eagles
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
−
<center>'''Coalition Letter in support of'''</center>
+
<center><big>'''Coalition Letter in Support of'''</big></center>
−
<center>'''our U.S. Constitution'''</center>
+
<center><big>'''our U.S. Constitution'''</big></center>
  
−
The undersigned organizations and individuals stand in support of the existing Constitution and oppose attempts to convene a new constitutional convention under Article V, which might attempt to rewrite it.
+
The undersigned organizations and individuals stand in defense of our U.S. Constitution and oppose all attempts to convene a new constitutional convention, also called a "Con Con."
  
−
State resolutions are being pushed by secret billionaires to convene a convention under Article V of the Constitution "to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government."  Such a convention would open the door to legalizing drugs and eliminating border security.  This means weakening our national security against terrorism, and cancelling plans to build a wall as promised.  The Second Amendment could be repealed, and state funding of abortion could required, under a new Constitution sought by the big money promoting an Article V convention.
+
State resolutions are being pushed by secret billionaires to apply to Congress to call a convention under Article V of the Constitution "to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government."  Such a convention would open the door to legalizing drugs and eliminating border security.  It would weaken our national security against terrorism.  Such a convention would probably seek to repeal the Second Amendment while inserting a new requirement for taxpayer-funded abortion.
  
−
No good, and much harm, would come from a constitutional convention that opens the door to changing our Constitution.
+
No good, and much harm, would come from a constitutional convention because it invite changing our Constitution, with the liberal media as a partner in the process.  
  
−
Justice Antonin Scalia condemned the proposal for an Article V convention as a "horrible idea." Phyllis Schlafly strongly opposed it, calling it "playing Russian Roulette with the Constitution."  Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote against it.  Second Amendment groups like the Gun Owners of America fully oppose it.  The Founders themselves were very much against holding another constitutional convention, and many of the greatest American statesmen throughout history were in complete opposition to the idea.
+
Justice Antonin Scalia condemned the proposals for an Article V convention as a "horrible idea." Phyllis Schlafly strongly opposed all Article V convention ideas, explaining that they would be "playing Russian Roulette with the Constitution."  Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote against the suggestion of holding a Con Con.  Second Amendment groups like the Gun Owners of America fully oppose it.  The Founders themselves were very much against holding another constitutional convention, and many of the greatest American statesmen throughout history spoke out passionately against the idea.
  
−
The Republican Party platform nearly unanimously rejected an attempt in July 2016 to include a resolution calling for an Article V constitutional convention to enact a Balanced Budget Amendment.
+
The Republican Party national platform committee rejected, nearly unanimously, an attempt in July 2016 in Cleveland to include a resolution calling for an Article V constitutional convention to enact a Balanced Budget Amendment.
  
−
Opponents of our Constitution want to repeal the Electoral College, without which no new Republican candidate would have won the presidency in the past 25 years.  Opponents of our Constitution want to repeal the Treaty Clause, which protects our Nation against harmful treaties with foreign powers by requiring a difficult-to-attain 2/3rds support in the Senate.
+
Liberals and the media want to repeal the Electoral College, without which no new Republican candidate would have won the presidency in the past 25 years.  Liberals and the media want to repeal the Treaty Clause, which protects our Nation against harmful treaties with foreign powers by requiring a difficult-to-attain 2/3rds support in the Senate.
  
 
The Constitution has never been the problem, and our political leaders should be defending the Constitution rather than pretending that it is the problem that needs to be somehow corrected.  Politicians and courts that do not abide by the Constitution today will not abide by a rewritten one tomorrow.
 
The Constitution has never been the problem, and our political leaders should be defending the Constitution rather than pretending that it is the problem that needs to be somehow corrected.  Politicians and courts that do not abide by the Constitution today will not abide by a rewritten one tomorrow.

Revision as of 23:57, 13 January 2017

Coalition Letter in Support of
our U.S. Constitution

The undersigned organizations and individuals stand in defense of our U.S. Constitution and oppose all attempts to convene a new constitutional convention, also called a "Con Con."

State resolutions are being pushed by secret billionaires to apply to Congress to call a convention under Article V of the Constitution "to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government." Such a convention would open the door to legalizing drugs and eliminating border security. It would weaken our national security against terrorism. Such a convention would probably seek to repeal the Second Amendment while inserting a new requirement for taxpayer-funded abortion.

No good, and much harm, would come from a constitutional convention because it invite changing our Constitution, with the liberal media as a partner in the process.

Justice Antonin Scalia condemned the proposals for an Article V convention as a "horrible idea." Phyllis Schlafly strongly opposed all Article V convention ideas, explaining that they would be "playing Russian Roulette with the Constitution." Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote against the suggestion of holding a Con Con. Second Amendment groups like the Gun Owners of America fully oppose it. The Founders themselves were very much against holding another constitutional convention, and many of the greatest American statesmen throughout history spoke out passionately against the idea.

The Republican Party national platform committee rejected, nearly unanimously, an attempt in July 2016 in Cleveland to include a resolution calling for an Article V constitutional convention to enact a Balanced Budget Amendment.

Liberals and the media want to repeal the Electoral College, without which no new Republican candidate would have won the presidency in the past 25 years. Liberals and the media want to repeal the Treaty Clause, which protects our Nation against harmful treaties with foreign powers by requiring a difficult-to-attain 2/3rds support in the Senate.

The Constitution has never been the problem, and our political leaders should be defending the Constitution rather than pretending that it is the problem that needs to be somehow corrected. Politicians and courts that do not abide by the Constitution today will not abide by a rewritten one tomorrow.

Additional reasons to oppose an Article V convention, or "Convention of States" as its promoters call it, include:


Conclusion

Our U.S. Constitution is the longest, most successful constitution in the history of mankind. It is not broken, and it should not be "fixed" by secret billionaires having their own secret agenda that they hide with broad resolutions like "limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government." Far too much is stake to gamble the future of our Constitution and our Nation on a runaway constitutional convention that could not stopped if it is ever started. Please oppose all proposals to convene an Article V Convention.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Retrieved from "https://pseagles.com/index.php?title=Coalition_letter_against_Convention_of_States&oldid=920"