Utah working for a Con-Con

[Mahonri]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/5 ... n.html.csp

Two Utah lawmakers are calling for a national convention

This is horrible news. I hope folks will get up and help organizations that are fighting this, The John Birch Society for example, otherwise everything else you are working on in the public arena will be for naught.

this is literally your chance to save the Constitution.

http://jbs.org/stopacon-con

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=357829214740

[lundbaek]

Certainly with the current crop in Congress a Con-Con could easily, and probably would lead to changes to the U.S. Constitution that would remove it still further from the blueprint for government that the Lord stated that He established it by the hands of wise men whom He raise up unto that very prupose. (D&C 101:80)

"So, brethren, I wish you to understand that when we begin to tamper with the Constitution we begin to tamper with the law of Zion which God Himself set up, and no one may trifle with the word of God with impunity." ( J. Reuben Clark )

[Mahonri]

do we not understand what it would mean to have Harry Reid as a Founding Father??

I am shocked that this has not caused more of a stir here

[lundbaek]

There should be nothing to argue about over this among members of this forum. What is needed is for Utahans who understand and appreciate the danger of a Con-Con to express their opposition to it to their congressmen. Have any of you Utahans done so?

[sbsion]

RIGHT ON................say goodnite USA

[patriotsaint]

I read a great article in this month's New American on this very subject:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php ... nstitution

Can any current politician actually be trusted as a delegate to a con-con? (except Ron Paul) How would modern delegates stack up against the likes of Madison, Adams, Jefferson and Washington?

This is one way TBTB are twisting the conservative movement. If they can convince us that a con-con would allow us to clarify the language of the constitution and establish what was meant originally, they have won. They will end this nation.

[lundbaek]

The original US Constitution (including the Bill of Rights) severely limited the authority and power of the FedGov. I believe that was the blueprint of our FedGov that the Lord put his stamp of approval on in 2 revelations given in 1833, in spite of imperfections that many constitutional scholars and lawyers point to.

Since then what some call the Supreme Court’s Constitution has evolved thru, among perhaps other things, case law resulting form lawyers’ and Supreme Court judges’ interpretations of parts of the Constitution. Also, I think we would agree that certain additional amendments to the Constitution “cometh of evil”.

The difference between the two Constitutions result in two profoundly different systems of government. I believe that the Supreme Court's Constitution is the result of the “tampering” that President Clark was referring to.