Alabama constitutional reform debate in Huntsville
Posted by Brian| February 26, 2008 | ||
| 7:00 pm | to | 9:00 pm |
This one almost flew under my radar…
Providing the differing points of view at a debate sponsored by the Alabama Citizens For Constitutional Reform (ACCR) will be Birmingham attorney Lenora W. Pate and Madison County Commissioner Mo Brooks.
The debate is the idea of retired Madison County District Judge Hartwell Lutz, a former state legislator and active member of the Huntsville-Sand Mountain chapter of ACCR.
“What we hope to gain by this is to focus some attention on the need to rewrite the constitution,” Lutz said. “The first step is to get the Legislature to pass a bill allowing the voters to decide if there should be a constitutional convention.
I don’t know Ms. Pate, but Mo Brooks is a formidable debater.
The debate is planned for Feb. 26 at 7 p.m. at Ridley Hall in the Episcopal Church of the Nativity, 208 Eustis Ave. The public is welcome.
I’ll offer up my thoughts on reforming Alabama’s constitution when I can find the time.
Related content:
February 21st, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Susan Pace Hamil is a big time socialist.
I wrote a new constitution and presented it to the Legislators and Governor every year for 4 years only to learn that they are not going to allow a Constitutional Convention and I agree with them. They want to rewrite the Constitution one section at a time.
I then wrote a bill which I feel is the most important part of the Constitution and presented that to them to no avail so far. You can find that at http://www.carolhagan.com
Hope I’ve been helpful.
Carol Hagan
February 21st, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Susan Pace Hamill is a “big time socialist”? Huh? I’ve always thought of her, as she describes herself, as a “pro-business moderate” with a big dash of Methobapterianism. She certainly wasn’t raised socialist, I don’t think she’s every been active in socialist politics/theory, and AFAIK, she practiced pretty straight up corporate tax law. She’s not, oh, libertarian or anything but I don’t see how pointing out that some states tend to place a larger tax burden on the poorer than on the richer and that, as a Christian, she would like to change that, is very socialist. I haven’t seen her call for social programs that are even a fraction of what many capitalist democracies commonly provide, say, universal health care or free higher education.
February 21st, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Here’s my $0.02 on Hamill…
Her personal philosophy on Christianity is deeply flawed. (First of all, tax policy shouldn’t be dictated by religious beliefs, but we’ll pretend!) She thinks that the “Christian” thing to do is for the government to forcibly take more money from some people and give it to others. That is a recipe for dependency, which is 180 degrees out of phase with traditional Judeo-Christian principles.
The truly “Christian” way to help out others is through voluntary charity (which is a redundancy since there is no such thing as forced charity).
Again, I don’t personally think it is appropriate to mix religion and taxation. I personally have strongly held morals that compel me to help others, whether it means giving to those in need or buying more expensive coffee because it means better wages for the farmers. However, if the government took my money from me to use for the very same reasons I voluntarily part with it then I would have a problem with that. It is a matter of principle. I believe in helping people better themselves. People like Hamill would prefer to make people dependent on government.
February 22nd, 2008 at 12:24 am
Brian, I’m not going to tangle with that. I respect that you believe that god and politics should not mix. And I respect that you are committed to charity. But I also respect this post for reminding me that why I’ve opted for a social contract with my fellow citizens away from AL.
As for Hamill, there are many criticisms one might level at her but just calling her a socialist is pretty weak. If she’s a socialist, well, Maggie Thatcher is a commie.
February 22nd, 2008 at 8:33 am
Maggie must be a commie then, because I took classes from Hamill, and she has admitted to preaching liberation theology. I have also read her writings and she is a socialist, pure and simple. But hey, so is W, in my book. (”Prayer can help…so can the government”) In one class she (reported to me by another student) told students that her plan was couched in Christian lingo in order to get the “religious rubes in Alabama” to go for it.
She was a pretty good professor and did not really get into that when I was in school.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:01 am
Okay, got it. (Except, of course, that liberation theology is usually a form of Catholicism.) I’ll recalibrate my internal political guidance system to set Reagan on Maoist and go from there.
Hamill certainly looks like a great teacher in interviews.
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Perhaps we define socialism differently. She was good but I sat next to a student from Turkey who was spending a year there and Hamill always used slang and I’d have to translate to my friend terms like “Pony up the dough” “CYA letter” etc…
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Liberation theology is huge in the catholic church in Latin America, almost to the point where it is more political than religious.
February 22nd, 2008 at 2:46 pm
…we define socialism differently…
Yup.
…Liberation theology is huge in the catholic church in Latin America…
Or it was. The last couple of Popes have not been too keen on Liberation theology.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:25 pm
SHe is not a full blown socialist though for Alabama, she seems so. I guess I should say she has some socialist tendencies b/c I doubt she meets the Webster def.
February 26th, 2008 at 6:03 am
[...] Alabama constitutional reform debate is tonight at 7:00 in Huntsville (click here for details). I’ll be there if I can break away from the [...]