Nowhere in the Constitution does it say it's illegal to ammend or change the Constitution. It actually outlines the process to make changes. The Constitution has several checks & balances. These checks & balances are there to prevent any person or party from "attacking" the country with unconstitutional legislation.
If legislation is offered that someone feels is unconstitutional, the process is in place to challenge these pieces of proposed legislation. This is what makes many of the accusations that come from the far right so outrageous. If they feel certain people are actually attacking the Constitution, why aren't these people being challenged. Why won't the accusers use the checks & balance process outlined in the Constitution? It makes it so obvious that many of these accusations are made simply to scare people. If they really thought the Constitution was under attack,they would act accordingly.
Re: you can look at this a couple different ways
There is 1 reply to this message
