>>>>Here's another question that bothers me a lot. Let's take for example, the 18th amendment to the constitution. That one abolished liquor from the U.S. and it was ratified on January 16, 1919. It was subsequently repealed by the 21st Amendement ratified on December 5, 1933 (just in time for xmas apparently). Ignoring, for themoment, the original stupidity of the 18th amendment, the point I want to make is simply that amendements can be made and they can be changed, or even repealed by further amendments.
>>>>
>>>>For some reason though, everybody talks about the 2nd amendement as though it is somehow sacrosanct and, well, different from all the other amendements in that it may never be questioned, changed, repealed, or even discussed except in some sort of veneration and awe.
>>>>
>>>>I know people like their guns, but what is it about that amendment that makes it so holy compared with other amendments such that it may never be questioned?
>>>
>>>The constitution is our backbone. It the basic rights granted to us. Ratifications are an extremely rare event and I compare it with a bug fix. It fixed something that should have never happened in the first place.
>>>
>>>The 2nd Amendment does not compare.
>>
>>Hmmm... see what I mean? In other words, you see the 2nd amendment as being perfect and entirely free of bugs. I, otoh, feel it is completely bug ridden because so many people disagree on what it means. Why not an amendment to the 2nd amendment that clears it up? Man, trying to get that ratified (either way) would be an argument for the ages.
>
>It should also be remembered that the 18th Amendment is also known as "The Failed Experiment" and is the reason why Congress shies away (or used to) from trying to legislate morality.

I didn't know it was called that. As for Congress shying away from trying to legislate morality, what are all those laws on prostitution, drugs, movie ratings, same-sex marriage etc about then?