Here's my stab at a XXVIIIth amendment:

[momta]

When the Constitution refers to 'men' or 'women' it shall be understood as 'people'.

1. 'People' shall be understood as natural born persons. These include, but are not limited to
a. Women
b. Men
c. Children
d. People of any race, ethnicity, gender or ability

'People' shall be understood to EXCLUDE
a. Corporations
b. Guns
c. Ova, sperm, zygote, blastocyst or fetus unable to survive outside a uterus

2. People have a right to privacy and bodily autonomy. No state shall make a law infringing on any person's right to privacy and bodily autonomy.

3. This right is not absolute, but shall be assumed except in cases where Congress has deemed it invalid due to age, criminal conduct, or threats to national security.

Now, just to be clear...


1. Please don't tell me how naive I am. I know it has no chance. Just wishin' and hopin'.

2. I'm sure those lawyers out there can pick this apart like maggots on a corpse. That's fine. I'm just trying to help.

[Hugin]

1. Sounds reasonable.

It is a shame it has come to this.

[LoisB]

2. Works for me.

[Buckeyeblue]

3. Good.

I think you just need #1 without qualification (I think the phrase natural born does your qualifying). And #2. I wouldn't include #3. Let those exceptions come about as they are needed.

[Lucky Luciano]

9. #3 helps with vaccine mandates for handling a national security threat.

[Wounded Bear]

4. Pretty good framework for an amendment...

I could support it, of course.

[Mr. Steve]

5. I like it

I particularly like the exclusions.

[KS Toronado]

6. Excellent way to help is ideas.

And you have a good one!

[Gore1FL]

7. I'd change "natural born" to "born"

Some Clarence Thomas wannabe of the 23rd century will use it to exclude c-section and test-tube babies.

[rubbersole]

8. Isn't "just wishin' and hopin' " lyrics from a '70s song?

Long-term memory is catching up with short-term memory in the race to the front door. Now where's my phone so I can post this...

[momta]

17. Yup. Dusty Springfield

I love this song

[rubbersole]

19. Thanks!

Yes, a great song done well.

[evolves]

10. I'd vote for that!

If I'm still able to vote...

[aggiesal]

11. Very good ...

Now all we need is an amendment that states "Money is not speech."

[onenote]

12. Where does the constitution refer to "men" or "women" except in your proposed amendment?

[RainCaster]

13. In the writings of the current SCOTUS

[onenote]

14. how is that relevant to an amendment that addresses "when the Constitution" refers to men or women?

[momta]

18. You're right, onenote. It doesn't

I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I checked, and you're right. The words don't appear in the constitution. So, I wouldn't mind just rewriting it to say "When the Constitution refers to 'persons' or 'people'...

[Picaro]

15. I think this is great

I think that this sort of amendment should be filed and the blue states should go after getting it ratified.

I’ve noticed over my lifetime that the Republicans start everything out this way. They propose some thing that by the standards of the day is just completely insane.

And they keep repeating it, year after year, until it becomes almost normal. They did this with citizens United, they did this with Roe v. Wade, they did this with the 2nd amendment. they just kept repeating the lie or the crazy proposition over and over and over again until it finally took hold.

They who propose dispose. If your proposal is the only proposal on the table then it will probably win.

we need to fight back with our own proposals. No matter how crazy and liberal they seem.

these people are not going to stop and we shouldn’t either. Let’s take the battle to them.

Thanks for writing this up.