A New Amendment to the Constitution of the United States?

AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES

No person shall be eligible to hold elective office, appointed office, or employment with the United States, who has not honorably served a minimum of two years active duty in the armed forces of the United States or served a minimum of sixty days deployment in a war zone as a Guardsman or Reservist.

For persons deemed physically ineligible for the military, two years alternative service, to be designated or instituted by the Congress, shall substitute for Military service..

Honorable discharge from the military, due to service connected wounds, injury, or illness, shall establish eligibility for the purposes of this amendment.

The provisions of this amendment shall not apply to those holding office or employment at the time of ratification.

Give me a little feedback on the idea. A movement is in the works. Those who are unwilling to serve, risk, and sacrifice for this country shouuld not be running it.

2012-11-09T15:21:38Z

What has happened to education in this country? One answer says it will be in violation of existing laws and a violation of the First Amendment.
HELLO !!!
Changing the law and Constitution is the idea!
JEEZ

?2012-11-09T07:47:17Z

Favorite Answer

Never going to happen. Our country has never required military service as a condition for holding political office, and it's a bit late to start now.

Anonymous2012-11-09T08:43:30Z

Excellent. I have 15 years in. Does this mean I can run for president 7.5 times? I believe my previous statement makes about as much sense as your proposed amendment. There's a reason that only a small percentage of the US population is eligible to serve. Let's keep it that way. Carry On!

Anonymous2012-11-09T07:47:31Z

It's a stupid amendment.

Why should the only people who can hold elective office be people who served in the military? The idea boggles my mind.

Is there something special about the military that makes a person a capable leader?

tupaj2016-12-26T15:23:02Z

The words separation of church and state do no longer look interior the form. The words interior the form are not any regulation respecting a company of religion, or prohibiting the loose prepare there of.

lana_sands2012-11-09T14:12:52Z

It is stupid to the 10th degree. Plus it would be in conflict with existing laws on discrimination. In fact, It would be held in violation of the 1st Amendment on religious grounds.

Show more answers (3)