Do you support the Titls of Nobility Amendment?

[they don't love you like i love you]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titles_of_Nobility_Amendment

No. This might've been relevant in the 19th century, but it hardly is today. Why there are people who still want its ratification is beyond me.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titles_of_Nobility_Amendment

No. This might've been relevant in the 19th century, but it hardly is today. Why there are people who still want its ratification is beyond me.

Because it's anti-democratic?

Though no I'm not in favour of this, but shows how genuinely radical the US was in the early 19th Century.. Pity how much has changed...

[they don't love you like i love you]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titles_of_Nobility_Amendment

No. This might've been relevant in the 19th century, but it hardly is today. Why there are people who still want its ratification is beyond me.

Because it's anti-democratic?

Only if titles of nobility were the slightest bit relevant today.

[MODU]

I would have to say no, and you misspelled "Titles" twice.

[John Dibble]

No. The US Constitution already forbids our government from giving out noble titles. There's no reason to deny someone office if they've been knighted by the Queen of England.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Yes, though I don't subscribe to the more radical interpretations some put to it.  There are very few true titles of nobility these days, as I would hold that a true title includes some degree of governmental power.  What remains are those that are more properly considered a "present, pension, office or emolument" of some kind and of the sort that Congress can grant authority under TONA for citizens to accept, and under the existing Constitution can grant authority for Federal office holders to accept.

[David S]

There was a rather obscure Flash Gordon moive many years ago which coined a new title of nobility for Ming the Merciless; "Your Ass-Holiness". Seems like a fitting title for some members of congress.

[memphis]

It does seem like a good idea. I don't really want Americans with allegiances to other governments. That said, I won't be losing too much sleep about it.

[StateBoiler]

Giuliani's received a title of nobility from the British government.

So maybe it's somewhat slightly relevant.

[Verily]

Giuliani's received a title of nobility from the British government.

So maybe it's somewhat slightly relevant.

Anything to keep Giuliani away from the Presidency!

No, it's a frivolous amendment. It's very reactionary, and, while I understand what it was reacting against, even at the time the idea was ludicrous.

[minionofmidas]

Well it doesn't ban anything not banned under the current constitution as well, just sets the punishment really.

[2952-0-0]

Something like this exists in Canada, which disallows Canadian citizens from taking foreign public offices. No one really cared about this law, until Conrad Black ran into it.

[Lief 🗽]

I don't really support amending the constitution for no reason, so no.

[DWPerry]

Well it doesn't ban anything not banned under the current constitution as well, just sets the punishment really.

It goes further than Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution. Saying that if you accept a foreign title of nobility, you are no longer a US Citizen.

I support this fully!

[they don't love you like i love you]

Well it doesn't ban anything not banned under the current constitution as well, just sets the punishment really.

It goes further than Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution. Saying that if you accept a foreign title of nobility, you are no longer a US Citizen.

Which might be a good idea if such titles were even remotely relevant today.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Well it doesn't ban anything not banned under the current constitution as well, just sets the punishment really.

It goes further than Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution. Saying that if you accept a foreign title of nobility, you are no longer a US Citizen.

Incorrect, my friends.  Under Article I Section 9, doing so merely strips a person of the ability to hold an office of or be employed by the United States.

TONA adds the stripping someone of their citizenship.

[J. J.]

Giuliani's received a title of nobility from the British government.

So maybe it's somewhat slightly relevant.

Actually, he has an honorary knighthood, which is not "noble" by any stretch of the imagination.

[StateBoiler]

Giuliani's received a title of nobility from the British government.

So maybe it's somewhat slightly relevant.

Actually, he has an honorary knighthood, which is not "noble" by any stretch of the imagination.

In the eyes of the law, is there any difference between honorary knighthood and noble knighthood? At college graduations, when people receive honorary degrees, they're still degrees that person has received.