From: Jeff Shultz 

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 23:15:37 -0400, John Beamish wrote:

> Ok, I will ... you've changed your constitution many times (once banning
> and then un-banning alcoholic beverages).  Since no one seems to have made
> a move, I think my observation, harsh as it is, is sound until your
> constitution is changed.
>
> "Jeff Shultz"  wrote in message
> news:pan.2004.09.25.01.24.23.455738{at}shultzinfosystems.com...
>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:19:57 +0100, Adam Flinton wrote:
>>
>>
>> I see that nobody is particularly disagreeing with my hypothesis...
>>
>>
>>
Changing the constitution is a fairly arduous and time consuming process.
Unless there appears to be a very good reason to change it... why bother?

I can see many good points to guaranteeing that the Chief Executive's first
and only national loyalty be to the USA. Which yes, does tend to be a
reason that Roman Catholics were viewed with suspicion on those grounds
- after all, wouldn't their first loyalty be to the Vatican?

No problem with that in Kerry... he's practically an ethnic RC rather than
a practicing one, from what I can tell.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5