DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.
There is already a method for changing the constitution. It has been done a number of times already. Are you asking whether or not we need an Amendments Convention?
The only updates that might be needed are Amendments as the modern electronic world develops and changes. However, these Amendments should not modify or revoke previous Amendments. The Constitution as it stands was written in general terms to describe the rights of the people in any circumstance. A common argument against the 2nd Amendment, for example, is that guns are now more advanced and should be treated legally differently; however, the actual wording of the Amendment only specifies the organization of arms and the right of the people to defend themselves, which are fine ideas that can be untouched my modern developments.
Yes. New laws are constantly being introduced and archaic ones deleted to reflect the the changed and ever changing world in which we live. In this context it is reasonable to assume that there are articles within the constitution which need amending/updated or even withdrawn.
The problem I have with the idea of revising or changing the U.S. constitution is primarily that no one can seem to bring any relevant information to the table about what it is specifically that they want to change. Words like "Archaic" and "Outdated" have been used alongside words like "Ancient". What is it specifically that needs to be thrown out? What specifically needs to be added? Most references that I've seen that contain any type of specifics as to the suggestion of change are concerning the "Right to Keep and Bear Arms". Additionally these suggestions for change also mostly include the demand that the 2nd Amendment was somehow referring to the right to have hunting weapons or the right to have a self-defense weapon and this ideology is so far off in left field that it's shameful to listen to or read.
Regarding the right to keep and bear arms, this "Right" was established as a preventative measure to keep the U.S. Government from becoming tyrannical or oppressive...that's it. Our Forefathers saw exactly what happens when there is no way to keep the Government in check and therefor created a system that would prevent their new Country from ever having the same issue. Simply put, if the Government has Assault Rifles...then we need them to. If the Government has fully-automatic weapons...then we need them too. Our Forefathers left the burden of keeping the Government in check on the shoulders of the people...should we then expect the people to fight back against the Government with pistols, shotguns and hunting rifles when they have Military grade weapons?
"If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?
"There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".
"Oh, you don't like my sarcasm? Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".
The problem I have with the idea of revising or changing the U.S. constitution is primarily that no one can seem to bring any relevant information to the table about what it is specifically that they want to change. Words like "Archaic" and "Outdated" have been used alongside words like "Ancient". What is it specifically that needs to be thrown out? What specifically needs to be added? Most references that I've seen that contain any type of specifics as to the suggestion of change are concerning the "Right to Keep and Bear Arms". Additionally these suggestions for change also mostly include the demand that the 2nd Amendment was somehow referring to the right to have hunting weapons or the right to have a self-defense weapon and this ideology is so far off in left field that it's shameful to listen to or read.
Regarding the right to keep and bear arms, this "Right" was established as a preventative measure to keep the U.S. Government from becoming tyrannical or oppressive...that's it. Our Forefathers saw exactly what happens when there is no way to keep the Government in check and therefor created a system that would prevent their new Country from ever having the same issue. Simply put, if the Government has Assault Rifles...then we need them to. If the Government has fully-automatic weapons...then we need them too. Our Forefathers left the burden of keeping the Government in check on the shoulders of the people...should we then expect the people to fight back against the Government with pistols, shotguns and hunting rifles when they have Military grade weapons?
I highly disagree with changing or revising our constitution. there are many issues with doing so including the following...
1) who will be changing it, an argument could spark regarding that. 2) Republicans and Dems can't agree on anything, how will they agree on this, they won't. 3) Possible legislative changes, including minor and major. 4)An outbreak could occur as well as a major debate. 5) American will be changed, and the document is a major part of our own country.
I agree with @CYDdharta . I will not advocate a balanced budget, but I would suggest strong limits by how much it can be exceeded and special measures to exceed it. Our national debt is growing out of control and we ate mortgaging the future of our country. I am highly concerned about other superpowers buying our debt, and therefore exerting tremendous leverage over us.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
  Considerate: 97%  
  Substantial: 36%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.02  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 98%  
  Substantial: 7%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 1.64  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.5  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 79%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 47%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.58  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 97%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.9  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
In this context it is reasonable to assume that there are articles within the constitution which need amending/updated or even withdrawn.
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 97%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.24  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 97%  
  Substantial: 25%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.92  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
Regarding the right to keep and bear arms, this "Right" was established as a preventative measure to keep the U.S. Government from becoming tyrannical or oppressive...that's it. Our Forefathers saw exactly what happens when there is no way to keep the Government in check and therefor created a system that would prevent their new Country from ever having the same issue. Simply put, if the Government has Assault Rifles...then we need them to. If the Government has fully-automatic weapons...then we need them too. Our Forefathers left the burden of keeping the Government in check on the shoulders of the people...should we then expect the people to fight back against the Government with pistols, shotguns and hunting rifles when they have Military grade weapons?
"There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".
"Oh, you don't like my sarcasm? Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 96%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 94%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 99%  
  Substantial: 6%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 1.74  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 87%  
  Substantial: 72%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.52  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
there are many issues with doing so including the following...
1) who will be changing it, an argument could spark regarding that.
2) Republicans and Dems can't agree on anything, how will they agree on this, they won't.
3) Possible legislative changes, including minor and major.
4)An outbreak could occur as well as a major debate.
5) American will be changed, and the document is a major part of our own country.
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.98  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 96%  
  Substantial: 62%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.24  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 96%  
  Substantial: 62%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.24  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 20%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.22  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 94%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.68  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 67%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 17%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.62  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra