The "missing" 13th Amendment banned attorneys from serving in public office. (That's an interesting story in itself - look it up.)
It seems to me that reinstating the 13th Amendment is something we should consider as we rebuild this republic. Donald Trump is a good example of how a different perspective can bring rational and unique solutions to running this country that haven't been considered before in our "normal" Congress heavily laden with attorneys.
I'd like to experience a Congress filled with merchants, doctors, engineers, bankers, and bright moms and dads. Especially if they are prevented from serving more than one consecutive term and take no retirement or other benefits from their service. What do you think? Is the US ready for this?
Just want to point out that Patty Murray (D) of Washington state began her congressional career as "A mom in tennis shoes"
But I 💯 agree with no outrageous benefits for them. They need to return to meeting just once or twice a year (each state should pay their travel expenses and provide a modest stipend) do the work that needs to be done then go home. It was never supposed to be a career. And servants (oh how they love to call themselves "public servants"!) should never live better than their masters (We the People who fund their lifestyles)
Theoretically, lawyers would know how to write laws.
But most of these people don't write any laws. Their think tanks and lobbyists write the laws.
Most of these people can't even be bothered to read the laws they vote on.
They don't write "laws" though. It's a sinister misuse of a word that should only have one meaning -> immutable, unchangeable facts of life.
Men and women (Congress) write "rules" or more appropriately "corporate policies" for their employees and dependents. That's what a statute, act, mandate, decree, order, etc. are.
But everybody is 100% brainwashed into BELIEVING men and women can "write laws". And worse, that our employees (Congress) can make up new rules that their employers are forced to abide by.
It's all insanity squared.
But to the orignaly posters question; the reason is, with the use of the LEGAL (not lawful) system, men and women can write rules by deftly using words with multiple meanings, as well as words that they make up on the spot in order to trick the masses. The entire legal system from top to bottom is replete with examples of this. Perhaps the most notable in recent memory was Dick Cheney's attorney who invented the term "enemy combatants" instead of "POWs", which then enabled them to get away with torturing them in direct opposition to the Geneva Convention.
The founders of this country created Congress to write the rules (corporate policies) exclusively for the people who directly worked for the federal government. Same is true for state congressmen. And look at how far we've fallen now.
You can boil down all of humanity's problems to once simple cause -> violation of free will. Government is, far and away, the greatest offender.
Until people see it and realize they don't need, and shouldn't have "leaders" and "lawmakers{, the controlling cabal is just going to keep getting away with it. The brainwashing runs far, wide and deep!
P.S. - and the OP is quite right about the original 13th amendment. But we're a long way's off from getting something similar in place any time soon. 99% of the population still thinks other men and women that work for them "have the right to make up laws (rules) that their employers are forced to abide by, by threat of violence no less....
Congress, the Presidency and other government offices are not held by run of the mill people. There in a nutshell is our problem. Our elected officials raise millions of dollars to get elected and are beholden to the donors, not to the voters, their constituents. If we put a cap on how much could be spent on campaigns, it would give bright young minds a chance to be elected. Those elected should not be handicapped by money, race, or sex, but rather should be elected by merit, knowledge and ability. Those who say HRC and Kamala lost because of race or sex, the response is no. They lost because they either did not relate to the people, they disdained their constituents, they ignored what the constituents wanted: freedom of speech/non-censorship, lower taxes, safety, closed borders, an end to DEI and LGBQT shoved down our and our children’s throats, focus on competent education (as opposed to DEI, sex, LGBQT/Gay pride), school choice, and love of country. They weren’t likable and one appeared corrupt, and the other just plain dumb.
Because they are super intelligent and totally ethical?
Lol
Definitely not!
Yes, I know.
A couple of old jokes that will probably get me in trouble, but here goes:
What do you call a group of lawyers' sky jumping?.......... Skeet
Why should lawyers' wear suspenders?............ It puts an X for a target on their back.
Sharks won't eat lawyers. Professional courtesy.
👍
Q: What do you call a bus full of lawyers going off a cliff?
A: A good start.
Thanks for your support!
How do you get a lawyer out of a tree? Cut the rope!
Thanks for your support!
Great point. It’s a high barrier to entry and you can indoctronate people along the way to “their way”
They are the a- holes who run for office.
We need more plumbers like Mark Wayne Mullins.
Me and my friends used to look thru list of voters,to find good Republicans and recruit them to run. Good people are busy with their lives,but when a team of good men talk to them and pledge their help and support,they are likely to run. We did this years ago,when we flipped oklahoma from blue to red. It didn't happen by accident. We worked hard for ten years and we went from never winning a race,to never loosing one.
Shakespeare suggested that we should kill all the lawyers. Henry V, Part II https://nosweatshakespeare.com/quotes/famous/lets-kill-all-the-lawyers/
The real irony would be how many of the founders were Attorneys and Lawyers.
25 of 56 signers of the Declaration were lawyers and or trained in the minutiae of law.
37 of the 55 Framers of the Constitution were Lawyers and Politicians
It’s doubtful there’d be serious consideration ever having been given to an Amendment banning Lawyers from Congressional Office. Which renders the lost 13th amendment an interesting exercise in its origin.
Considering the majority of the people who created the Constitution were Lawyers. And just under half of the signers of the Declaration were.
And why would they ban themselves from serving in the offices and Government they created?
That's a bit misleading, though.
"Attorney" means one who represents someone else in a legal matter, or sells legal advice.
"Lawyer" means one who is learned in the law.
Back then, every "high society" man was a lawyer, as well as an historian, a biblical scholar, and many other things, as well as tradesman and farmer.
With no internet, no computers, no TV, no radio, not even a phonograph, what would YOU do with your time?
The lost 13th does not mention anything about lawyers. It's just that some people infer that it must mean that, when there is no reason to assume it does. After all, these same "lawyers" you just mentioned would have been in office (and practicing law) when it was passed -- 1810. They would not have eliminated themselves from ever running for office or practicing law.
Those who claim it is about lawyers are just wrong
In 1810, the War of 1812 was brewing. The British wanted to "take it back," so they wanted to make sure there were no dual citizen thingys (dual allegiance) in the American government.
Exactly. They wouldn't. And didn't.
Then they have to remove all the benefits to those who won them illegally. I'd really love to see that!!
Congress is already filled with merchants, and therein lies the problem.
I don't think we have elected anybody just yet ;-)
BEST QUESTION EVER!!!
That's the biggest problem in my view.
Rich elites created Lawyers in the first place. They will always sell the people out.
I don't know any politicians, but every single lawyer that my family was ever involved with was a scumbag.
About BAR attorneys: https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/british-accreditation-registry-crown-temple-b-a-r/