Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles
Title: Sixth Grade Assignment: Destroy the Bill of Rights
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.infowars.com/sixth-grade ... nt-destroy-the-bill-of-rights/
Published: Oct 8, 2013
Author: Kit Daniels
Post Date: 2013-10-08 17:21:09 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 6309
Comments: 7
Sixth graders at the Bryant School District in Arkansas were given an assignment to “revise” the “outdated” Bill of Rights by deleting and replacing two amendments, using the “War on Terror” and the Patriot Act as a guide.
Students weren’t taught about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights before they were assigned to destroy them. (Photo: Public domain)
The worksheet, which is the first Constitutional assignment of the school year, tells students that they will be on a “National Revised Bill of Rights Task Force” who will “prioritize, prune, and add amendments” for a “Revised Bill of Rights.”
“The government of the United States is currently revisiting the Bill of Rights,” the assignment states. “They have determined that it is outdated and may not remain in its current form any longer.”
The assignment assumes that our birthrights are not our property that we inherently own as human beings but are rather privileges granted to us by the state after being decided upon by a central planning committee.
Instead of teaching that the Bill of Rights merely recognizes the rights that we ALREADY have regardless of any government erected upon us, the teachers would rather instill the idea that the State is God into the minds of our youth.
As the history of the world has shown throughout the ages, people who don’t defend their rights will be enslaved.
This assignment, however, conditions children into believing that they are already slaves to the state and should be thankful of the “rights” the majority grants them.
The scenario of the assignment also ignores Article Five of the Constitution, which describes the actual process of proposing and ratifying amendments.
A parent of a girl in the class, Lela Spears, said that this was the first assignment given to the class dealing with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
“When I asked my child what the assignment was to teach her she had no idea, Only that she was TOLD to do it.” Spears said as reported by Justin King. “I believe that, with the wording of the assignment, many children will think that the Bill of Rights is amended and can be changed by a ‘special’ committee instead of an act of Congress.”
Below is the assignment’s introduction in full:
There has been a lot of controversy lately surrounding the War on Terror. Many feel as though The Patriot Act is infringing upon our privacy and other individual liberties, while others feel protected by it. The government of the United States is currently revisiting the Bill of Rights. They have determined that it is outdated and may not remain in its current form any longer. Their aim is to ensure that our personal civil liberties and the pursuit of happiness remain guarded in the 21st century. The government has asked for input from experts on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. You have been selected to participate on the National Revised Bill of Rights (NRBR) Task Force. You will be working in a small team with others who may or may not share your values and opinions. You have been charged with the task of revisiting and editing the Bill of Rights. More specifically, you will need to prioritize, prune, and add amendments and then turn your ideas into a Revised Bill of Rights. Your team’s proposal will be submitted in its final form as a persuasive presentation to Mrs. Knight and associates. She and her associates have been given the important charge of judging the proposals based on valid arguments demonstrated by its authors during the presentation.
This isn’t the first attack on the Bill of Rights in the public school system.
Last month, school textbook authors inaccurately defined the Second Amendment as “the right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.”
This trend will continue as the federal government consolidates their control over the minds of children through the Common Core curriculum. (1 image)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
This is "Brave New World" stuff.
If my kid had this assignment I would have him hand in a paper which outlines everything Harry Reid and the admin has done over the past 5 years as evidence the constitution was already trashed.
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
#2. To: redleghunter (#1)
We live in an evil time.
Whoever still supports Obama is the enemy.
#3. To: redleghunter (#1)
We could get rid of two amendments and add two and have a good gain actually.
First get rid of direct election of Senators.
Next get rid of the 19th amendment.
Then the fun begins.
#4. To: A K A Stone (#3)
Next get rid of the 19th amendment.
I don't agree with repealing the 19th Amendment...come on Stone, really?
What about changing the voting age to 28 or 30 years of age. That is the new "maturity" level in our post-modern society.
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
#5. To: A K A Stone (#3)
First get rid of direct election of Senators. [Amdt. 17]Next get rid of the 19th amendment. [women's suffrage]
First, get rid of the 16th Amendment. [unapportioned income tax]
Second get rid of the 14th Amendment and replace it with one or more Amendments which clearly and unmistakeably state what they mean in a manner that is virtually impossible to misinterpret. It reads like an omnibus bill and fundamentally changed the relationship of the States and the Federal government, and addresses citizenship and the public debt.
You might want to go into the Articles and look at revising Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, granting power to the Congress, "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." About 99% of Federal government actions are justified as an exercise of the interstate commerce clause, with Federal courts interpreting the constitutional power to extend to anything that directly, indirectly, or remotely affects interstate commerce. This could be rephrased to eliminate such expansionist interpretation.
To add something, we might consider adding the gist of what was written in Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2, at 120-121 (1866) (9-0).
The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government.
#6. To: nolu chan (#5)
You might want to go into the Articles and look at revising Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, granting power to the Congress, "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." About 99% of Federal government actions are justified as an exercise of the interstate commerce clause, with Federal courts interpreting the constitutional power to extend to anything that directly, indirectly, or remotely affects interstate commerce. This could be rephrased to eliminate such expansionist interpretation.
Yes the 14th would be better to replace then the 19th I suppose.
An amendment clarifying that interstate commerce is interstae commerce shouldn't be needed but it is unfortunately needed.
I was thinking of an amendment that would be good. One that barred anyone who has ever been a member of the democratic party from ever holding office or voting. :)
#7. To: redleghunter (#4)
I don't agree with repealing the 19th Amendment...come on Stone, really?
What would be the consequence of repealing the 19th? Would it be a net gain or minus for our nation as a whole? I'm kind of saying it in jest but it would be a positive in actual results.
How about just letting married males vote. As the head of the household. No queers don't count they aren't married no matter what some queer in a black robe proclaims.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]