  > no practical way to ever update the Bill of Rights in the 21st century

What on earth do you mean? The practical way is the same as it always was: subsequent amendment. The fact that it requires consensus is a feature.

This reads the same way as people who say things like “we just have to accept that Congress is broken and can’t pass new legislation.” Like hell we do!

▲ lazide 2 days ago | parent [-]

They mean ‘have you seen congress? Good luck’, not that the mechanism is mechanically harder to use.

▲

qingcharles 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

This. Getting enough states to agree on a change would be a fool's errand I think. It seems like the reds and blues can't agree on anything at all any longer.

▲

graveemaster 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I agree 99% with you, except when it comes to these enormous data centers. When you look at the local zoning committee meetings, you're seeing Reds, Blues and Ind mostly calling for a moratorium on build sites in their communities.

	▲	lazide a day ago \| parent [-]
		What does that have to do with anything that would plausibly be in the bill of rights?

▲

Henchman21 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I mean, after decades of manufactured cultural rifts, we're right where the powers that be want us to be. Disorganized and ripe for exploitation.

▲

expedition32 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

People in my country hate eachother yet nobody pretends it's still 1848- the year the Dutch constitution was written.

	▲	lazide a day ago \| parent [-]
		Count yourself lucky.