Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
Consider the following, /his/:
>body of original United States Constitution consists of seven articles, styled Article I - Article VII
>Ratified Amendments to the Constitiution legally become part of the Constitiution itself - the full text of the Constitution therefore changes insofar as new amendments are added over history
>the amendments are commonly styled "articles of amendment", or simply "Articles", e.g. "article XIII" for the 13th amendment, etc
>this numbering convention for the amendments starts from Amendment I, or "Article I", and not from "Article VIII", to describe the first amendment
>>
The Amendments that are specifically to do with civil rights are called the Bill of Rights.
>>
>>2215115
Yes, anon, but this doesn't have much to do with what I'm talking about.
In the official documents which have historically proposed Amendments to the states via acts of Congress, The official style is usually "Article such-and-such" (this style is missing from certain documents, but is so prominent throughout the documents that its usage has become commonplace). A perfectly clear example of the style is here, for the thirteenth amendment: Article XIII.
Although of course the numbering scheme changed as ratification took place, the original Bill of Rights document also uses this ordinal Article language to refer to each piece of legislation: "Article the Third" (the first amendment), etc.
So far as I have been able to investigate, there is historical inconsistency about how the headings of what we now call "the first amendment, the nth amendment" etc are actually supposed to be styled. "Article __" or "Amendment __" seem to be taken for granted as being good enough, whereas the "Article I" language is perfectly clear and present in the original primary document of the Constitution.
>>
>God given rights
>God was wrong on more than twenty different counts, including firearm possession, slavery, consumption of alcohol (briefly, untill he wasn't), and how long someone is allowed to be president for
Hohohohohohohoho, you are funny >U>S>A
>>
>>
>>2215197
Hey.
"by their creator"
That could be evolution or some shit.
>>
File: 1483734854669.png (66KB, 326x558px) Image search:
[Google]
66KB, 326x558px
>>2216204
>tfw you realize your parents by law have to give you inalienable rights
BEDTIMES BTFO
AM I BEING DETAINED
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3