this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2026
26 points (100.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

47413 readers
973 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

From a perspective of how hard it is to subdue

Edit: sorry for info-dumping guys. Constitutions are my special imrerest and I wanted to hear other people's thoughts.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Lowering the threshold for amendments would actually weaken the Constitution, not make it stronger.

Imagine if they just kept flip-flopping back and forth on abortion or citizenship status every 8 years, at a Constitutional level. Every federal rule and regulation that Congress tried to implement based on current law, would have to be renegotiated every time an amendment was altered. The federal government would be locked into a permanent state of revisement, and literally nothing else would get done, as long as those basic issues remained permanently unsettled. Not to mention, people's lives would be constantly fluctuating between opposing statuses.

The harder it is to make amendments to the law, the more stable the society becomes. Once something is codified into the Constitution, it should be extremely difficult to reverse. 2/3rds is actually a very reasonable majority under the circumstances. Less would be too easy...and more would be virtually unachievable.

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Oh I see, 2/3 isn't that bad. I was under the impression it required 3/4 of all states – but that's the alternative method, right?

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Ok, to be additionally specific...it takes 2/3rds in both the House and Senate or it takes a Constitutional convention, where 2/3rds of the state legislatures are needed to propose an amendment, and 3/4 of them need to ratify it. So, you are correct on the 3/4, if they go the convention route. I was really only thinking about Congress when I wrote that.

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

I goess that does leave the congressional route far more viable. Idk when the convention route would ever be easoer