5 ms·

Surely its just publicly documenting criminal acts for law enforcement purposes when looking at data privacy laws like EU GDPR? Mind you, when will the legal s

Surely its just publicly documenting criminal acts for law enforcement purposes when looking at data privacy laws like EU GDPR? Mind you, when will the legal system admit it non-consensually forces itself onto people from the day one is born? I wonder who does more harm especially as we are supposed to live in a democracy where we can pick and choose our politicians and thus legislators, and yet the state doesn't teach law to people in a tldr way. The legal system is certainly dictatorial in a fascist dictator way, so does that make law abiding citizens little fascist dictators, who use a mere transgression of the law, to unload their pent up frustration of violence on those around them? I will say this, the US constitution is so vague, its barely worth repeating let along harping back to for court cases. Time to update the constitution for the 21st century, unless it should be viewed simply as a tldr in todays modern times?

deprecative 3y ago
If we updated the constitution then we'd have slavery back in effect and there would be no separation of church and state.
- hnfong 3y ago
  Without "updates" you wouldn't even have the First Amendment...
  - deprecative 3y ago
    The processes via which we update that Constitution. I wasn't speaking to historically I mean now. We cannot get amendments ratified through the normal Congress + States approach. We'd have to do the whole Constitutional Convention thing. That opens the entire Constitution up for changing. If that happens, because land means more than people, we'd have the chucklefuck brother-husbands in charge of the process.
- darkclouds 3y ago
  Why would you have slavery back and no separation of the church and state? If the Christian Church can recognise it needed a New Testament, then why not a new US constitution. I'm sure many of religious followers would accept the need for change and updates, as technology and business in general demonstrates on a daily basis. Or is the resistance to change simply demonstrating peoples needs or desires to live in some rose tinted past of human history, that has white washed the abominations of the past? If it does, should these people be making decisions for lots of people?
  - deprecative 3y ago
    Conservatives are actively trying to do both at present. Let's not give them power to do either.

deprecative 3y ago

If we updated the constitution then we'd have slavery back in effect and there would be no separation of church and state.

hnfong 3y ago
Without "updates" you wouldn't even have the First Amendment...
- deprecative 3y ago
  The processes via which we update that Constitution. I wasn't speaking to historically I mean now. We cannot get amendments ratified through the normal Congress + States approach. We'd have to do the whole Constitutional Convention thing. That opens the entire Constitution up for changing. If that happens, because land means more than people, we'd have the chucklefuck brother-husbands in charge of the process.
darkclouds 3y ago
Why would you have slavery back and no separation of the church and state? If the Christian Church can recognise it needed a New Testament, then why not a new US constitution. I'm sure many of religious followers would accept the need for change and updates, as technology and business in general demonstrates on a daily basis. Or is the resistance to change simply demonstrating peoples needs or desires to live in some rose tinted past of human history, that has white washed the abominations of the past? If it does, should these people be making decisions for lots of people?
- deprecative 3y ago
  Conservatives are actively trying to do both at present. Let's not give them power to do either.