this is a fantastic come back! why would we want to put ourselves in such a compromising position when there is such a clear solution.

I agree! We cannot allow them to get the nuclear power to wipe us out.

I agree. We need to ease these tensions, without the deal Iran poses an imminent threat to the safety of our country.

The United States needs to sign the Iranian nuclear deal to ensure that Iran doesn't become another North Korea. Iran wants change; some of Iran wants to westernize and reform their country, and we need to tie them into this agreement before they develop nuclear power that could pose a significant threat to our country. Ever since President Trump pulled out of the deal in 2018, Iran has resumed with some nuclear activities. Re-signing this deal would be beneficial for both countries: we have the assurance of no nuclear threat from Iran, and thanks the the deal the Iranian economy will flourish.

I agree, under the Constitution we would have absolutely no freedom, and we would revert back to the tyranny we worked so hard to escape.

Under no circumstances should the Constitution be ratified. By creating a position that makes one person "Commander in Chief" we are coming too close to the monarchy in England. It is too easy for this strong national government to transition into a complete dictatorship and we will once again face the tyranny we did with England. With this Constitution under the necessary and proper clause the national government could deem anything to be "for the good of the country" and just get away with it. In addition to that, the supremacy clause allows the national government to override state courts, and who knows the people of the state better than its own people?? By giving power to the states, you of course prevent any sort of dictatorship and control concentrated in one government. Furthermore, you have a smaller scale more local version of courts and therefore representatives who will know the people and region they're representing far better than a representative for an entire state. The Articles of Confederation are a far better fit for the kind of democracy this country needs right now, because under the Articles of Confederation, the power lies in the states and not a overpowered national government.

This is a good point, and it relates back to @Dexy 's claim that we read the I Have a Dream speech too often. It is the only piece of literature based on race that I can remember reading with the exception of Letter from Birmingham Jail.

I agree that we do talk about MLK's speech a good bit, but it is because racism and the civil rights movement are such important parts of our history. However, I think we talk about the War of 1812 and the Spanish American War a good bit and I think we talked about those subjects in class an appropriate amount. The War of 1812 was between Britain and France and America over independence, and the Spanish American War was sparked over an explosion and America's support of the Cubans.

I agree, we cannot change the past, we can only learn and grow from our history.

Can you give an example of a time we talked about race that was unnecessary?