Military Review

Passion under the constitution

59
Passion under the constitution
Against the background of the duty panegyrics on the occasion of the 20 anniversary jubilee of the Constitution, two proposals for introducing fundamental changes to its text evoked a public response. A group of Orthodox public figures called for a reference to the special role of Orthodoxy in the formation of Russia and its culture. And the deputy Yevgeny Fedorov stated the need to lift the ban on the state ideology and cancel the priority of “international” legislation over our national.



The howl of liberals of all stripes makes it possible to say that both of them are in the top ten, as they say. They are outraged by the very thought of revising the “sacred” Constitution and are voting on the supposedly existing desire of the ROC to make Orthodoxy a state religion. This is accompanied by “pugals” about the protests of Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Catholics, Protestants, shamanists, violation of the rights of atheists and about the soon turning of Russia into “Orthodox Iran”, where tomorrow women will be forbidden to go without a headscarf ...

If these were children, it would be possible to say: they are fooling around, that is, they are posing as fools. Because adults cannot but know that it was the common faith that formed the Russian people from the loose union of the tribes, who then created Russia. What exactly the values ​​of Orthodoxy formed the basis of the national worldview, culture and state ideology. And that this basis has been preserved even when, at the “imperial” stage of development, streams of other peoples and cultures flowed into the Russian river. Moreover, even in the atheistic Soviet era, the “Moral Code of the Builder of Communism” was based on Christian tenets ...

So they know, but they lie. Why? Because today Russia is at a very important stage: after two decades of liberal timelessness, when we were moving in a dead end, we are finally trying to realize what Russia is, where it went from and where it should go. And the mention in the preamble of the Constitution of Orthodox roots is not only a statement of an indisputable fact, but also a claim that we will rely on our traditional values ​​and approaches. And not on Western dogmas - the cult of consumption and success, the primacy of the personal over the public, “freedom”, understood as maximum rights with minimum responsibilities ... That is, it’s about a change of course, and it is this, and not the offended feelings of the Chukchi shamans, that the liberals are outraged , who rushed to defend the "inviolability of the Constitution."

Absolutely from the same opera - a negative reaction to the proposals of the group Fedorov. After all, the constitutionally enshrined absence of state ideology is Russia's refusal from the right to have its own national values, its own path of development. That is, the prospect friendly to liberals for Russia - “to be a trailer trailer for someone else’s train” was laid down in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. And the primacy of international law over national law is nothing more than an indicator of the actual absence of sovereignty and the presence of external governance.

“Yes, but the Constitution is holy, it cannot be touched!” - liberals are outraged. Sorry, gentlemen, but, first, the proposals to amend or even replace the Constitution are a normal political struggle, and not an illegal appeal for a violent change of the constitutional order. And secondly, the Constitution is not the Bible. This is just a more or less democratically adopted Basic Law, by which the victorious political force legitimizes its tenure. This is especially true of the current Yeltsin's Constitution of 1993.

Can we call it democratically accepted or reflecting the will of the people? Judge for yourself. So, December is 1993 of the year. Two months ago, an unconstitutional coup was committed (arbitrary abolition of the Constitution by decree of the head of one of the branches of government is called that way). The result is a political crisis, blood; the parliament, which did not wish to obey, was shot, the democratically elected government bodies (councils) were dissolved, the Constitutional Court was dispersed, and the opposition was actually banned. The fullness of the executive, legislative and judicial power is concentrated in the hands of one person who himself (and despite all the laws in force) appoints a nationwide vote on the text of the Constitution proposed by him. And at the same time - elections to the authorities, which should only be introduced by the constitution that has not yet been adopted.

Next comes the vote. A little more than half of citizens participate in it, of which again a little more than half (according to official results) vote “for”. That is, in fact, about 32% instead of the required ones (50% + 1) voted for the Constitution as a result. However, a command comes in - the Constitution is considered adopted, and the voting ballots are urgently destroyed. What was done. That is, compared with what was going on in 1993 with the hot approval of many of the current oppositionists, even the most serious violations at the elections of the 2011 of the year are baby talk ...

Agree, to consider such a Constitution by the will of the people, and even more so something almost sacred, as proposed by today's liberals, there is not the slightest reason. But this, of course, is no reason not to recognize her at all. Yes, our Constitution is in many ways bad, hindering sovereign development, contrary to traditional values ​​and, to put it mildly, not quite legally accepted. But the thing is that worse than the worst law can only be its absence. That is lawlessness, unrest. However, it is impossible to leave everything as it is: this is the way to the abyss. So it is necessary, living under the current Constitution, to attend to the development and adoption of a new Basic Law - such as Russia needs for sovereign development. And do it without haste and campaigning. Until then, change the existing Basic Law for the best, wherever possible.

Of course, by imposing the Constitution "for themselves" on the country, Yeltsin and the Western consultants who helped him put into it the maximum obstacles to change something. However, probably due to an oversight of the liberals gentlemen, the article survived, according to which the people of sovereignty and the only source of power in Russia are its people. Which, be it his desire, has the right to change the Constitution, the political and economic system, and any laws. Really, sin is not to take advantage.
Author:
Originator:
http://portal-kultura.ru/articles/obozrevatel/19693-strasti-po-konstitutsii/
59 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. makarov
    makarov 4 December 2013 07: 38
    +1
    I do not presume to judge the Constitution of the Russian Federation, but it is known for certain that in the “degenerating and decaying” Great Britain the Laws exist 200-300 years ago, and they are not canceled. The reason is simple - THE LAWS WORK REALLY.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 4 December 2013 07: 44
      16
      Quote: makarov
      "UK Laws exist 200-300 years ago, and they are not canceled. The reason is simple, - LAWS WORK REALLY

      Well, yes, according to the law of England, it is forbidden to come to the university with swords and armor. The law works really, why cancel it laughing
      1. makarov
        makarov 4 December 2013 17: 28
        0
        According to the Law of the Russian Federation, it is also forbidden to come to the university with swords and armor !!
        For example:
        Argued Russian and amerikos who has more "freedom of speech". Amerikos said: - I can go out to the white house, yell at Reagan, a stupid and scoundrel, and nothing will come of it. To which the Russian man replied: - Eka is unseen. I, too, will go to Red Square, and I will shout that Reagan is a dumbass and a scoundrel, and nothing will come of it either.
    2. radio operator
      radio operator 4 December 2013 07: 49
      15
      Our constitution is written with a focus on Europe and the United States.
      When the decisions of our court are disputed by the European court.
      This is wrong, we are a sovereign country, especially since gays in droves complain of "oppression." The European Court of Human Rights demands the repeal of our anti-sodomy law.
      Therefore, the constitution must be drafted.
      1. vladimirZ
        vladimirZ 4 December 2013 08: 54
        13
        The constitution adopted in the dictatorship of the US puppet drunk Yeltsin, who committed a criminal offense - the shooting of the highest legislative body of Russia - the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation, must be changed if we want to live in a sovereign state !!!
        The current Constitution, written with the help of US advisers, has laid the "self-destruction mines" of the state.
        The people of Russia did not accept the 1993 Constitution, it was imposed on it by the pro-Yeltsin dictatorship, by forging the results of the vote.
        All this is the basis for the adoption of the new Constitution of the state.
    3. CTEPX
      CTEPX 4 December 2013 08: 06
      +2
      Quote: makarov
      I do not presume to judge the Constitution of the Russian Federation, but it is known for certain that in the “degenerating and decaying” Great Britain the Laws exist 200-300 years ago, and they are not canceled.

      "In UK law there is no distinction between" constitutional "and" current "law - there is a general procedure for the adoption and amendment of laws, which determines the" flexible "nature of the main law, the possibility of its modification without going through a complex procedure of amendment or addition, as in other countries (adoption in a referendum, a qualified majority in parliament, etc.). At the same time, the stability of the law is protected by custom. " (from wikipedia).
      And the laws there change quite often)).
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. APES
      APES 4 December 2013 09: 24
      +5
      Quote: makarov
      I take to judge the Constitution of the Russian Federation


      for both sentences I say yes

      And my choice is confirmed:
      The howl of liberals of all stripes suggests that both, as they say, are in the top ten.


      PS I don't care about Great Britain and its laws
    6. alekseyal
      alekseyal 4 December 2013 12: 47
      +3
      Britain has no constitution
      1. Pinochet000
        Pinochet000 4 December 2013 13: 05
        0
        Quote: alekseyal
        Britain has no constitution

        Yeah, in Israel, too, no, did not think why?
        1. alone
          alone 4 December 2013 19: 20
          0
          laughing you can of course write and adopt the best constitution and laws. There is nothing difficult in this. The difficulty is only in observing these laws and the constitution.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. mirag2
    mirag2 4 December 2013 07: 39
    +8
    As for Orthodoxy, a long conversation, but what Putin said: "... that some kind of responsibility should be introduced for calls for the dismemberment of Russia, that this is a violation of the Constitution, where it is said that Russia is indivisible ..." very good and on time.
    1. Yarosvet
      Yarosvet 4 December 2013 14: 49
      0
      Quote: mirag2
      Here is what Putin said: "... that some kind of responsibility should be introduced for calls for the dismemberment of Russia, that this is a violation of the Constitution, which says that Russia is indivisible ..." - this is very good and in time.
  4. Civil
    Civil 4 December 2013 07: 40
    -5
    1. To approve Orthodoxy as the state religion, those who disagree with the exile to the Orthodox construction sites of capitalism!
    2. To approve the leading role of United Russia, to ban all other parties.
    3. Abolish ownership of property for persons with medium and low income.
    4. To abolish pensions, since a pensioner cannot work effectively for the good of the party and people.
    5. To prohibit travel abroad to persons who have not passed checks in the regional cell of the party and the patriarchy. :-)

    Humor humor, but if accepted, no one will say a word.
    1. Canep
      Canep 4 December 2013 07: 50
      +6
      Quote: Civil
      1. To approve Orthodoxy as the state religion, those who disagree with the exile to the Orthodox construction sites of capitalism!
      2. To approve the leading role of United Russia, to ban all other parties.
      3. Abolish ownership of property for persons with medium and low income.
      4. To abolish pensions, since a pensioner cannot work effectively for the good of the party and people.
      5. To prohibit travel abroad to persons who have not passed checks in the regional cell of the party and the patriarchy. :-)

      Good joke. laughing I propose to add:
      6. Create a system of labor camps for non-believers.
      7. Recognize the Russians as the highest race. good
      laughing laughing laughing
    2. radio operator
      radio operator 4 December 2013 07: 52
      +1
      Quote: Civil
      3. Abolish ownership of property for persons with medium and low income.
      4. To abolish pensions, since a pensioner cannot work effectively for the good of the party and people.

      This is for the opposition, which hates Orthodoxy, veterans and "survivors" - pensioners.
    3. Airman
      Airman 4 December 2013 10: 39
      0
      Quote: Civil
      1. To approve Orthodoxy as the state religion, those who disagree with the exile to the Orthodox construction sites of capitalism!
      2. To approve the leading role of United Russia, to ban all other parties.
      3. Abolish ownership of property for persons with medium and low income.
      4. To abolish pensions, since a pensioner cannot work effectively for the good of the party and people.
      5. To prohibit travel abroad to persons who have not passed checks in the regional cell of the party and the patriarchy. :-)

      Humor humor, but if accepted, no one will say a word.

      And who will speak, if they are in accordance with clause 1, part 2, without the right to correspondence.
    4. Uncle
      Uncle 4 December 2013 12: 04
      +1
      Quote: Civil
      To affirm Orthodoxy as the state religion, those who disagree with the exile to the Orthodox construction projects of capitalism!

      Quote: Civil
      Humor

      Where does the hatred of Orthodoxy come from? More precisely, I will formulate the question this way: what does a cross, a six-pointed star or maybe a crescent moon stand on your grandmother’s grave?
      1. Civil
        Civil 4 December 2013 14: 55
        +3
        Uncle, a red star on the grave like his grandfathers, there is no hatred for Orthodoxy, there is hatred for obscurantism, money-grubbing and the frank use of Orthodoxy for personal selfish purposes.
  5. Valery Neonov
    4 December 2013 07: 41
    +2
    It is time in the Constitution to change a lot AND NOT IN THE BENEFIT OF LIBEROGUEROVERS. Probably after the collapse of the USSR, the only state in the POST-SOVIET SPACE It's Russiain which amendments to the MAIN LAW are not adopted.
  6. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 4 December 2013 07: 47
    +1
    A very good indicator - if the general people are resolutely and categorically against it, then it's worth it. 2 Chechen, Hodor, re-election of GDP, ban on geypropaganda, Syria now this
  7. PSih2097
    PSih2097 4 December 2013 07: 48
    0
    Of course, having imposed the Constitution on his own behalf, Yeltsin and Western consultants who helped him put in it a maximum of obstacles in order to change something.

    Hold a referendum (before slamming Churkin) ...
    1. CTEPX
      CTEPX 4 December 2013 11: 42
      0
      Quote: PSih2097
      Hold a referendum (before slamming Churkin) ...

      For adoption of amendments to the Constitution, the Constitutional Assembly is convened)). The law on which has not yet been passed)).
  8. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 4 December 2013 07: 49
    -1
    The idea is good, but not for the Russian Orthodox Church since it was not the original religion. Before Chrestianism, we had only one faith, in our father and mother. It was they who were considered gods, the one who created you. We had faith and not religion. As for Svarog and other gods who were also honored, these were and there are beings who have reached a high level of spiritual development. They are defenders of light forces. How many stories have been cut off from us, the extermination of the people on all fronts, but we are alive despite!
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 4 December 2013 08: 17
      0
      Quote: tronin.maxim
      .As for Svarog

      Svarog sect and its activities are prohibited by the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation!
  9. radio operator
    radio operator 4 December 2013 07: 57
    +1
    Changes to the Basic Law are long overdue.
    We need ideology, like air.
    It is also necessary to amend the spiritual development of society, relying on the country's traditional faiths.
    It's time!
  10. Pharao7766
    Pharao7766 4 December 2013 08: 36
    +1
    I would like to mention who wrote the so-called constitution...
    surnames, as I understand it there to hell ... but the fact that Chubais, Albert Paul Blaustein and similar characters from the State Department participated in the writing (says), says what it was done for.
  11. Sharingan
    Sharingan 4 December 2013 08: 54
    0
    I propose to consolidate in the Constitution of the Russian Federation a fundamental role in the development of Russia of scientific knowledge of the world, secular humanistic ideology.
    Beginning with Peter I, when the Church was reformed and subordinated to the state, Russia finally began to leave the path of religious denseness on the Enlightenment road. And since then, not thanks, but contrary to the Russian Orthodox Church, it has developed to one of the world's scientific powers.
  12. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 4 December 2013 09: 01
    +1
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    Quote: tronin.maxim
    .As for Svarog

    Svarog sect and its activities are prohibited by the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation!

    I do not mean a sect. There are many sects: witnesses of egovs and the like, I am talking about those gods that are among the Slavs! Of course there are many impostors, tobish sects, respectively, and the result.
  13. bairat
    bairat 4 December 2013 09: 05
    -1
    Yesterday on OTR there was a heated discussion on this subject with the participation of this very deputy Fedorov. He was opposed by the Communist deputy as well. I got the impression that Fedorov either moved off the coils (well, it is not clear how United Russia can talk about the occupation regime in the Russian Federation) or this is such a tricky move. Rather, the second, the Communist deputy says: you party in power want to rewrite the constitution for yourself, deprive citizens of the Russian Federation of the opportunity to consider their cases in European courts, and the words about the occupation regime are covering tinsel.
    1. CTEPX
      CTEPX 4 December 2013 12: 23
      0
      Quote: bairat
      as United Russia can talk about the occupation regime in Russia)

      Quote: bairat
      Communist deputy says: you party in power want to rewrite the constitution for yourself, deprive citizens of the Russian Federation of the possibility of considering their cases in European courts

      Perhaps it’s just that in the party of power there are separate people - patriots, and some so-called Communists believe that Russia should not be a sovereign power?))
      1. Yarosvet
        Yarosvet 4 December 2013 15: 00
        0
        Quote: ctepx
        Perhaps it’s just that in the party of power there are separate people - patriots, and some so-called Communists believe that Russia should not be a sovereign power?))
        1. CTEPX
          CTEPX 4 December 2013 18: 39
          -1
          Quote: Yarosvet


          AND? Apparently all those who voted did not know about a much stronger version of the so-called. the law "about Dima Yakovlev?))
          And Fedorov, perhaps, knew)).
  14. aviamed90
    aviamed90 4 December 2013 09: 19
    +2
    The constitution, of course, needs to be changed.
    And, of course, by popular vote, and not by-laws.

    But what version of it will we be offered? In the direction of deterioration for the people or in the direction of improvement?

    And we need real guarantees of its observance, and not just words.
  15. calocha
    calocha 4 December 2013 09: 22
    +1
    We would nationalize the RUBLE together with the National Bank. Yes, stop the outflow of capital from the country. Then we could think about more ...
  16. cenych
    cenych 4 December 2013 09: 24
    -2
    Quote: calocha
    We would nationalize the RUBLE together with the National Bank. Yes, stop the outflow of capital from the country. Then we could think about more ...

    For this, too, it is necessary to change the Constitution, because the National Bank is completely independent from Russia.
  17. washi
    washi 4 December 2013 09: 28
    +2
    Why be wise? Introduce the world's most democratic constitution - the 1936 USSR.
    Only the composition of the country will have to be temporarily changed
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 4 December 2013 09: 32
      +1
      washi

      Then the CPSU (b) will have to be restored in accordance with its article 126.
    2. Yarosvet
      Yarosvet 4 December 2013 15: 03
      0
      Quote: Vasya
      Why be wise? Introduce the world's most democratic constitution - the 1936 USSR.

      Offer it to Wife Fedorov, look at his reaction laughing
  18. Stalin
    Stalin 4 December 2013 09: 38
    10
    Quote: bairat
    Yesterday on OTR there was a heated discussion on this subject with the participation of this very deputy Fedorov. He was opposed by the Communist deputy as well. I got the impression that Fedorov either moved off the coils (well, it is not clear how United Russia can talk about the occupation regime in the Russian Federation) or this is such a tricky move. Rather, the second, the Communist deputy says: you party in power want to rewrite the constitution for yourself, deprive citizens of the Russian Federation of the opportunity to consider their cases in European courts, and the words about the occupation regime are covering tinsel.



    Lord, what are you like children, by God! Well, you have finally woken up and read something to start with the basics of neurolinguistic programming. Yesterday's show on Medvedev's liberal channel ORT was held precisely according to the canons of neurolinguistic programming. They take one person who tells the TRUTH, then 6 people opponents, whose goal is to ridicule this person, while you can not say anything at all, you just have to press a dull smile, as did the old senile who was closer to the presenter. He just smiled like the whole program, the same was done by the fat communist and the redhead near Fedorov, the others were also against Fedorov, but did not give out a stupid smile. THE VERDICT of the program (for which it was conceived) is a complete discrediting of the truth in Fyodorov's words and exposing him as a laughing stock. They succeeded. And this is how people have been duped with the help of the media for more than 20 years. Yes, open your eyes at last, the Russians have always been the wisest people, you will learn to understand the situation, where is the truth, and where is an outright lie. And finally, the words of Joseph Goebbels: Give me the hands of the media of any country and I will make a manageable herd of pigs out of the people. "To be honest, it is disgusting and disgusting from our TV, especially from such programs as yesterday from ORT.
    1. Valery Neonov
      4 December 2013 12: 36
      +2
      Stalin with us ... wow ... belay hi
  19. bairat
    bairat 4 December 2013 09: 56
    +2
    Quote: Stalin
    Take one person who tells the TRUTH

    People who know the "TRUTH" scare. Where did the visions come from, or are you traveling in dimensions? Well, tell your opinion, time will tell where the truth is and where not. I now express my opinion: Fedorov seemed inadequate to me. They ask him: why do you yourself adopt the laws of occupation? - he says well, I can't do otherwise, the system is like that. A strange comrade.
    1. cenych
      cenych 4 December 2013 10: 54
      0
      Well, open and read the Constitution carefully. Fedorov, of course, cringe in the fact that he is too emotional, but he speaks correctly.
      1. bairat
        bairat 4 December 2013 11: 42
        +2
        He understands everything but votes for anti-Russian law because the system is such - that is what surprises me. And they twist the constitution as they want, removed the election of governors and extended the presidential term easily, you and I were not asked.
        1. cenych
          cenych 4 December 2013 11: 53
          0
          Article 135 (and protects itself):

          1. The provisions of the chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation cannot be revised by the Federal Assembly.

          2. If the proposal to revise the provisions of chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation will be supported by three-fifths of the total number of members of the Federation Council and State Duma deputies, the Constitutional Assembly is convened in accordance with federal constitutional law.

          3. The Constitutional Assembly either confirms the immutability of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, or develops a draft new Constitution of the Russian Federation, which is adopted by the Constitutional Assembly by two-thirds of the votes of the total number of its members or is put to the popular vote. When conducting a popular vote, the Constitution of the Russian Federation is considered adopted if more than half of the voters who participated in the vote voted for it, provided that more than half of the voters participated in it.

          It is there that the main shortcomings of the Constitution are located (Articles 1-64 and 134-137).
          The system is such, because we lost the Cold War and had to make concessions, but now Russia has more or less got on its feet.
          1. bairat
            bairat 4 December 2013 12: 01
            +2
            Yes, please, let them redo the constitution through a popular vote, if it is overdue (although the contested points were also present in the USSR constitution, which did not prevent the whole world from bending down).
        2. Ivan.
          Ivan. 4 December 2013 16: 46
          -1
          Quote: bairat
          And they twist the constitution as they want, removed the election of governors and extended the presidential term easily, you and I were not asked.

          That's when this "constitution" was introduced, they didn't really ask. The short term of the presidency is really a disaster (for this it is imposed), they just get to know each other and delve into the course of the matter for several months + the loss of trillions for all these elections (after the defeat of Germany in 1918, elections were held every six months, it is clear that the Germans were not the initiators) constant changes of power - this is an analogue of Krylov's fable swan, cancer and pike, that is, the country is being dragged in different directions in free time from elections. Regarding the governors, too, from the same opera, if the governors are elected and not appointed, then we get several disadvantages at once - the elected governor leads his own (or sponsors') policy and not the state policy, it is more difficult to remove the elected one even if he is involved in illegal actions, a lot of money is spent on elections, he says he fulfills his promises and not obligations, he is more eager to show off so that he can be chosen again ...
        3. CTEPX
          CTEPX 5 December 2013 07: 22
          -1
          Quote: bairat
          but votes for anti-Russian law

          And where does the information come from that the abolition of the election of governors or the extension of the presidential term is an Ani-Russian act?))
          That’s anti-democratic - for sure. And the democracy being introduced to us - anti-Russian - is also for sure)).
    2. Yarosvet
      Yarosvet 4 December 2013 15: 13
      0
      Quote: bairat
      he says well, I can’t do otherwise, such a system.

      He also claims that it is the Constitution that makes him vote for anti-constitutional anti-people’s laws. laughing
  20. JIaIIoTb
    JIaIIoTb 4 December 2013 09: 58
    +1
    I completely agree with the author. Article plus.
  21. Stalin
    Stalin 4 December 2013 10: 10
    +2
    Quote: bairat
    Quote: Stalin
    Take one person who tells the TRUTH

    People who know the "TRUTH" scare. Where did the visions come from, or are you traveling in dimensions? Well, tell your opinion, time will tell where the truth is and where not. I now express my opinion: Fedorov seemed inadequate to me. They ask him: why do you yourself adopt the laws of occupation? - he says well, I can't do otherwise, the system is like that. A strange comrade.


    When you read about the methods of neurolinguistic programming, then you will understand why this program was created at all.
    They only touched the Constitution, and raised the liberal howl in all the media. But practice shows that if liberals raise a howl, then the authorities are doing everything right. If Fedorov carried nonsense, then the liberals would never have accepted attempts to discredit him, but they would not have paid any attention to him. But here he encroached on a liberal den, so urgently need to defame the name of Fedorov and make him a laughing stock. Yesterday it was done clearly according to telezombing patterns. People ate and then happily sniffs on the couch.
  22. bairat
    bairat 4 December 2013 10: 16
    -4
    Quote: Stalin
    If Fedorov carried nonsense

    not if, but he carried it. Do you think the communists have also become liberals?
  23. radio operator
    radio operator 4 December 2013 10: 29
    +1
    Quote: Sharingan
    I propose to consolidate in the Constitution of the Russian Federation a fundamental role in the development of Russia of scientific knowledge of the world, secular humanistic ideology.
    Beginning with Peter I, when the Church was reformed and subordinated to the state, Russia finally began to leave the path of religious denseness on the Enlightenment road. And since then, not thanks, but contrary to the Russian Orthodox Church, it has developed to one of the world's scientific powers.

    Dear, what is the contradiction between the Russian Orthodox Church and science?
    There is a contradiction between atheism and science.
    Many scientists, if not most, are believers.
  24. I do not care
    I do not care 4 December 2013 10: 29
    +2
    I do not presume to judge the Constitution of the Russian Federation, but it is known for certain that in the “degenerating and decaying” Great Britain the Laws exist 200-300 years ago, and they are not canceled.


    Makarov, in small Britain there is no constitution at all.
  25. Stalin
    Stalin 4 December 2013 10: 32
    +2
    Quote: bairat
    Quote: Stalin
    If Fedorov carried nonsense

    not if, but he carried it. Do you think the communists have also become liberals?


    This is your little horse: they tell you about one thing, and you about another. It was suggested to you that he was nonsense. Have you ever watched Fedorov’s performances? If not, then talk nothing. See the old senility. And where did you see the real Communists? All communism (socialism) was buried in 1953 after the assassination of Stalin. And now these false communists are liberals working for the complete collapse of Russia.
    1. Pinochet000
      Pinochet000 4 December 2013 16: 33
      0
      Quote: Stalin
      All communism (socialism) was buried in 1953 after the assassination of Stalin.

      Exactly.
  26. Vasia kruger
    Vasia kruger 4 December 2013 10: 36
    0
    I am not a liberal, but against the inclusion in the constitution of any mention of Orthodoxy. We are a secular state, this time. Secondly, religious obscurantism ... well, there is no place for him in the laws. Well, actually.
    Let religion remain in the temples of mosques and other synagogues.
    I understand that our constitution is science fiction)
    IMHO of course.
  27. bairat
    bairat 4 December 2013 10: 39
    -1
    Quote: Stalin
    This is your little horse: they tell you about one thing, and you about another.

    I express my opinion, and you begin to push about neurolinguistics along the way by hanging labels and deciding where the lie is and where the present is.
    Quote: Stalin
    Have you ever watched Fedorov’s performances? If not, then talk nothing.

    bye
  28. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 4 December 2013 10: 57
    +1
    As for the ideology, I agree, we don't have a geyrope with his own multiculturalism, "common European" values ​​don't suit us, though it's another question about who will form this very ideology? Is it Medvedev with the team? I'm afraid then something will turn out from the point of view of a normal person creepy, so it’s past. As for Orthodoxy, it seems that the same constitution says that Russia is a secular state, and then there will be a clause about the "special role" of Orthodoxy, how should this be understood then? I personally don’t want gay European values , here I seem to have a common position with Orthodoxy, but I am absolutely reluctant in the Middle Ages, so in principle, with some modifications, you can leave the current constitution, removing the mines planted by American advisers from there.
    1. Yarosvet
      Yarosvet 4 December 2013 15: 21
      0
      Quote: Standard Oil
      another question about who will form this same ideology?
  29. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 4 December 2013 11: 08
    +3
    It is necessary in the Constitution to change the state system of Russia. Why in Russia do we need a bunch of presidents (in the republics)? This is a consequence of the war for sovereignty, which unleashed B. Yeltsin. There should not be republics. Russia should consist of provinces led by governors. BUT The president for all of Russia is one.
  30. Pinochet000
    Pinochet000 4 December 2013 12: 30
    0
    Quote: makarov
    The reason is simple - LAWS WORK REALLY.

    Why is there no constitution in England and Israel? What laws do they live by?
    1. Ivan.
      Ivan. 4 December 2013 16: 59
      +1
      Quote: Pinochet000
      Why is there no constitution in England and Israel? What laws do they live by?

      According to the thieves, of course - the most working laws.
  31. polly
    polly 4 December 2013 13: 58
    +2
    How many Burbulis and their foreign bosses have worked on this "sacred" constitution! And suddenly take and change? Not for that they fought ... Salvage is the only ideology, and God forbid, another will appear! Hence the "howl of liberals of all stripes ..."
  32. alex84
    alex84 4 December 2013 14: 44
    0
    Well, let's remove from the constitution all the articles related to international law and who then will become the bulk of the population, and it will become real slaves. People can be forced to work 80-100 hours a week (more can be done), in fact, nothing to pay them,
    for the poor, to abolish medicine, education, private property rights, to ban ideology other than the ruling party, and the fact that this ideology will be beneficial only to the minority (those who have the money) no one thought for some reason - and so on, that is, make the bulk without power. This is now beneficial primarily to crooks and oligarchs, Gaster can only do the most dirty work, they are poorly trained, and Russian can be taught to do more difficult work, so among the rich crooks now more and more talk about labor camps.
    Remember all the last laws, it’s better for a simple person to live on, I don’t remember such a law, so think who is interested in changing the Constitution, and to change something, they don’t even hold an all-Russian referendum, but they change a narrow circle of people, which is clearly will not think about most people.
    It is not the Constitution that needs to be changed, but our legislation, and to monitor its implementation. The main problem of the Russian Federation is precisely that the laws do not apply to wealthy crooks, i.e. the laws are not the same for everyone and are executed only in the right direction. Putin said that tariffs for housing and communal services were overestimated and that it was necessary to deal with this, and that, but nothing had changed, tariffs were increasing more and more every year. If everyone does not care about the presidential decree, then what kind of observance of the laws can be discussed, and the higher your position, the more you are practically not responsible for anything.
    It may be enough to blame everything in the United States, but it’s better to look at our officials and oligarchs, what they are doing for the common people and for the Russian Federation
  33. Ustas
    Ustas 4 December 2013 15: 12
    0
    The constitution must be changed!
    Especially articles
    - about ideology
    - about the earth
    - about the central bank
    - about natural resources
    etc.
    1. Yarosvet
      Yarosvet 4 December 2013 16: 28
      -4
      Quote: Ustas
      The constitution must be changed!
      Especially articles
      - about ideology
      In the meantime, we will discuss which one to fix as a state one, we will manage to arrange a small civil war with the aim of finding out which ideology is more correct - Islam, or Orthodoxy; liberalism, or neoliberalism; socialism, or monarchism, etc.

      - about the earth
      Something they do not offer.

      - about the central bank
      We will give the emission control into the hands of a government headed by neDimon !!! - so you want?

      - about natural resources
      etc.
      Do not offer.

      They only offer to allow state ideology (that is, to replace the liberal-socialist ideology, which is the filling of the first 2 chapters of the Constitution, with nothing known and unknown by anyone proposed) and abolish generally accepted norms and principles (the right to life, to work, to social security etc.)
      1. cenych
        cenych 4 December 2013 23: 16
        0
        A change of ideology is the first step, if it goes further they will go more seriously.
        Ha.ha supposedly we have an ideology, when we have it prohibited. There are full rights and principles, only there are no duties, except for paying taxes.
      2. CTEPX
        CTEPX 5 December 2013 08: 05
        0
        Quote: Yarosvet
        that is, replace the liberal socialist ideology

        What kind of elephant is this - liberal-socialist ideology? You still have a "fascist-communist" or other hard-soft ideology for Russia, come up with)).
        Quote: Yarosvet
        abolish universally recognized norms and principles (the right to life, to work, to social security, etc.

        Dr. Goebbels principles in action?))
  34. Yarosvet
    Yarosvet 4 December 2013 15: 28
    0
    Here's yesterday’s program with Mad Fedorov - who cares
  35. Christian
    Christian 4 December 2013 18: 24
    -1
    The article is a huge Russian Orthodox +++ !!!
  36. alone
    alone 4 December 2013 19: 28
    0
    it is necessary to work on the constitution in such a way that every 10 years there is no need to revise it. This applies to everyone, not only Russia
  37. Ascetic
    Ascetic 4 December 2013 19: 31
    +2
    It is too early to discuss what changes will be in the Constitution and whether there will be any at all. Recently, the Constitutional Council under the President was created, its task is to prepare a "constitutional block" for the annual Address on December 12.
    So far we are talking about five articles of the Constitution which are POSSIBLE to undergo change.
    1. 95 article.
    2. The Federation Council includes two representatives each from each subject of the Russian Federation: one from the representative and executive bodies of state power.

    It is planned to make the senator from the representative body not an appointed position, but an elected one. Now, in addition to the election of the governor, citizens will be able to choose their senator from the region.
    2. 126 and 127 articlesdedicated to the Supreme and Arbitration Courts. The liquidation of the Supreme Arbitration Court and the transfer of all its functions to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is envisaged. According to political scientists and liberals, this will lead to further centralization of power.
    3. 81 Article
    3. One and the same person may not hold the office of the President of the Russian Federation for more than two terms contract.

    It is planned to remove the word-contract. That is, the activities of the President are LIMITED TO TWO TIMES, that is, no more than 12 years in total. THEREOF THE POSSIBILITY OF THIRD DURATION IS EXCLUDED IN THIS WAY. She is no longer threatening Putin himself, for it will enter into force in 2018. And then he can go to the polls in 2018 both according to the new and the old Basic Law. But the trick is that he can run in 2014, while under the old Law this was prohibited ( three consecutive terms)
    4. 103 article With regard to the conduct of the State Duma.
    The lower house may expand powers. In particular, the State Duma will be able to to raise the question of the resignation of ministers. In addition, deputies will be able to exercise tight control over budget spending.
    5. 32 Article.It declares the general principles of citizens' participation in the management of state affairs and electoral law. They are planning to make an amendment according to which the elections will be held on the basis of the Constitution and not the Federal Law "On Elections".