|Back to Back Issues Page|
Return to American Constitutional Principles is the path to national salvation.
April 09, 2012
American Constitutional Principles.
Vic Biorseth, Monday, April 09, 2012
In any current-era discussion on American Constitutional Principles, the conversation frequently dissolves into varying interpretations of the Constitution itself. And that’s the problem. We’re not supposed to have to interpret it; we’re just supposed to read it. The Constitution is not a political thing, subject to political interpretation; or, at least it’s not supposed to be. It is not designed to be variably interpreted. Here is the first and most important, absolute, unchangeable American Constitutional Principle all American children and adults need to know:
The American Constitution is a fixed, legal document, written in English, that says very specific legal things.
There is nothing fuzzy, indistinct or variable about it. Every word was carefully chosen, argued, debated and accepted by the original Authors and Framers so that it would be indelibly recorded for future generations to read, and fully understand, exactly as written. It is written in very simple, straight-forward, unambiguous English.
The interpretation problem with our Constitution is the same problem that exists involving Holy Scripture. Differing human interpretations have resulted in literally thousands of denominations, including even multiple non-denominational denominations, each with some unique human interpretation of the Word that differs from all the others. The same problem reared its head in the Catholic Church with the publishing of the new Catechism of the Catholic Church under John Paul the Great. Normally, the Church publishes important documents first in Latin and then translates them into various languages for the rest of the world. For some reason, that time, the original Catechism was first published in French for first approval, and upon approval, translated into English and other languages from the French.
The problem arose when it was discovered that the English translators had not simply translated, but interpreted the words of the Catechism putting a different spin on them that was not to be found in the original French. The American (English) version had been so grossly miss-interpreted from the French that it had to be recalled and completely re-written from scratch to satisfy the Pontiff and the Cardinals. I only put this seemingly unrelated anecdote here to illustrate the difference between translation and interpretation.
When you read our Constitution, you are not supposed to be looking for ways to make it support some political opinion or position. That’s interpretation. You are supposed to simply translate the written English words into the original thoughts the authors intended to transmit to you. It is written in very direct language. The very first thought that comes into your mind when you read any clause or sentence is almost certainly the thought that the authors intended for you to experience. Keep it simple. It is not some lofty intellectual tome; it is quite simple English and there is nothing difficult about reading and fully understanding it. An eighth grade elementary school education is all you need.
Every important teaching, even when recorded in a permanent document, needs some authority to keep it from being corrupted by miss-interpretation over time. In the Catholic Church, that authority rests with Peter, in the person of the Pope, the Bishops in concert with the Pope, and the Holy Ghost. They provide the Catholic guarantee that the original Gospel message and Holy Scripture remain uncorrupted.
In America, the sole authority to keep the Constitution from being corrupted by miss-interpretation over time is we, the people. Not the government; us, the educated people. (Educated here does not mean Lettered; it merely means that we can read.) It is our bound duty to understand it, protect it, and teach it to our children, in its original, unchanged, raw, un-interpreted form. The greatest protection the Constitution can have is an educated public that knows the law. When the ship of state goes off course, we, the people, are supposed to take the tiller and correct the course. That is our duty as Americans. We make our government. If we don’t continuously control and restrain our government, it will change, it will get loose from us, it will ignore our Constitution, and our government will ever increasingly seek to control and restrain us.
American Constitutional PrinciplesAmerican Founding Principles form the American national purpose for being, the reason the Constitution had to be written, and the specific principles and ideas that the Constitution was designed and intended to protect. From the American Founding Principles page:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.So, these then are our national founding principles, taken from the quote above:
These founding principles, then, form the very purpose for our national being, and the foundational purpose underlying our Constitution. See the American Founding Principles page for more detail.
American Constitutional PrinciplesSupreme law of the land. From Article VI Paragraph 2:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.All legislated laws must be made “in pursuance thereof,” meaning in full accord and agreement with the Constitution. No state Constitution or legislated law, and no local charter or law may oppose or conflict with any element of the federal Constitution. This is our only guarantee that future laws and lower governments may not interfere with our rights or with the organization of America as established in the American Constitution.
American Constitutional PrinciplesCitizen Sovereignty. The American government was brought into being with the consent of the governed, and it continues to legitimately hold the power to govern only with the consent of the governed. Remember, from the Founding Principles, the very purpose for the government’s existence is to protect certain God-given and unalienable citizen rights. When any member of government acts to restrict or eliminate any of those unalienable rights, or any citizen rights enumerated in the Constitution, it is the duty of the sovereign citizens to replace him.
American Constitutional PrinciplesLimited Government. The legitimate powers of American government are spelled out in the Constitution, and they may not be exceeded. They are tempered by the principle of Federalism, spoken of below, in which governing power is shared with state and local governments; and they are further restricted by specific citizen rights spelled out in the Bill of Rights – the first ten Amendments originally ratified with the rest of the Constitution. The government’s legitimate interest in legislating, taxing and spending is restricted to the areas listed in Article I Section 8, as quoted here:
Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
These are the proper functions of American government, and the limited areas of authorized government responsibility. This is what is supposed to be legislated. Most of the rest of the Constitution involves itself with limiting or restricting government power.
American Constitutional PrinciplesSeparation of Powers. America has no monarch; in the absence of a monarch, it is necessary that governing authority and responsibility be divided among highly principled men, who are then trusted to properly
The House of Representatives is an elected body with members popularly elected from Congressional districts, determined by population, from the individual states. Originally, members of the House of Representatives were the only federal level officials who gained their position through popular vote. There is one Representative for every 30,000 citizens in the population, but no state is to have less than one Representative regardless of population. Each Representative has one vote.
The Senate was designed to counter-balance the House and to counter the political advantage of heavily populated states over lightly populated ones, by not being a popularly elected body. Article 1 Section 3 originally designated that two Senators from each state would be appointed by their State Legislature to represent, not the people of the State, but the sovereign State itself. The relationship of Senators to the federal government was therefore comparable to that of foreign Ambassadors, with full power to treat on behalf of their sovereign state, as if it were a country. Each Senator has one vote. Since every law must pass both Houses of Congress, the Senate thus presented an equalizing force between highly populated states and lightly populated ones.
(Amendment XVII changed the appointment of Senators to be by popular election in their State. Proposed in 1912 and ratified in 1913, under Woodrow Wilson, this was done by Progressives (Marxists under a softer title) who sought to move America away from being a Constitutional Republic and toward becoming a pure Democracy. Before Amendment XVII the Senate was, like the Supreme Court, above politics and aloof from political campaigns. After Amendment XVII the Senate became just another purely political House of Congress, but with fewer members and thus more power. The Senator no longer serves the interests of his sovereign State alone, as an ambassador representing the State government, for the Senator no longer stands above and insulated from popular election and local politics. He is now just another politician gathered round the same pork barrel.)
The President and Vice President are elected by the Electoral College, comprised of Electors from each state; the number of Electors for each state equals the number of Representatives and Senators for that state. Rules for appointing Electors are left to the states. It is the Constitutional responsibility of the President to Execute all legislated laws pursuant to the Constitution. Once a law is in existence, it must be enforced, by law, and the Executive Branch is the branch that executes the law. The President may not execute the law selectively. Any officers he appoints for that purpose must be appointed only with the advice and consent of the Senate.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and the final court of appeal in matters of law and fact. Like the Senate (as originally designed) the Supreme Court is supposed to be above and insulated from all politics by not being elected. Justices are appointed to office for life; they are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Three co-equal branches of government. Between the three branches of American government – the Congress, the Presidency and the Supreme Court – no branch has authority or power over any other branch. There is a strict division of responsibilities with fixed lines that may not be crossed. The three sets of responsibilities may be described as Legislating Law, Enforcing Law, and Adjudicating Law. It is the exclusive domain of the Legislative Branch to make law. It is the exclusive domain of the Executive Branch to execute law. It is the exclusive domain of the Judiciary Branch to adjudicate law. Again, no branch holds any special authority or power over any other branch. All must operate strictly pursuant to the simple English of the Constitution.
Checks and Balances. To keep the three co-equal branches of government co-equal, a system of checks and balances was designed into the Constitution. The Executive Branch holds the power to veto (nullify) a bill passed by Congress and prevent it from becoming a law. The Congress holds the power to override a veto, provided they can muster a super-majority of 2/3 majority vote, in both Houses of Congress, to do so. And the Judiciary Branch holds the power of Judicial Review with which, when a challenge to a law is brought before the Court, the Supreme Court may strike down and nullify a duly enacted law, when and only when that law is in conflict with the Constitution.
Judicial Review may be the only American Constitutional Principle that may not be found in the Constitution; it was established in the Maybury v. Madison decision of 1803, which established it in law as a legal precedent. Since then, under the legal-precedent doctrine of Judicial Review, the High Court has struck down hundreds of duly enacted federal, state and local laws that were challenged all the way up to the Supreme Court. There is no provision in the Constitution making the Supreme Court the final arbiter of the literal meaning of the Constitution. However, so long as Court decisions in Judicial Review cases address the law in question in light of the literal English meaning of the Constitution, Judicial Review remains a vital counter-balance to the Legislative and Executive branches in the interest of serving the higher Constitutional law that binds them all.
American Constitutional PrinciplesFederalism. In America, sovereignty is Constitutionally shared and divided between citizens, individual states and the federal government, by covenant, which is concretized in the Constitution. The Framers would not finalize the Constitution until it contained the Bill of Rights, including Amendments IX and X, which state:
So limited power to govern is delegated from the people and from the states to the United States government. Some governing power or authority is unique to the federal government, some is unique to the states and some is shared. The authority to coin a common currency, for example, is reserved to the federal government; the individual states cannot do that. Likewise, treating with foreign governments, appointing ambassadors, declaring and prosecuting wars and so forth are reserved to the federal government. The express powers that are unique to the federal government are limited and carefully enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. The purpose of the Commerce Clause was to leave states open to free commerce between them, so that states would not charge a tariff tax or other import fee for products sold or transported between states. Citizens and commercial products are to be free to cross state lines without hindrance, fee, tax or fine.
American Constitutional PrinciplesEnemies of the American Constitution.
Marxism in every existing variant is diametrically opposed to the American Constitution and to the American Founding Principles. Whether the Marxian variant is Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Nazism or any other variant, alone or in combination, or in any combination with Democracy, it is opposed and antagonistic to the American Constitution as written. There can be no reconciliation or compromise position between any form of Marxism and the American Constitution in which the Constitution stands as written. As Marx himself said,
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property. --Karl Marx.The absolute right to private property was established in the original Bill of Rights in Amendment V, and reinforced again in Amendment XIV; under the Constitution, no innocent American citizen can be deprived of his private property without due process of American law. The Marxian notion of Redistribution of Wealth, or the redistribution of anything, flies in the face of the American Constitution. Fomenting class envy leading to any form of Marxism violates the Commandment to not covet; redistribution violates the Commandment to not steal; it also violates the American principles of liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the Constitutional right to private property. Marxism is an alien ideology that has no proper place in America.
Marxism is, at its root, a political fraud; it is a long-term strategy aimed at eventual world domination, while deceiving followers into believing that it is a drive toward the perfection of man, the perfection of society, and the achievement of utopia – man-made heaven on earth. That utopia – the worker’s paradise of Communism – does not exist, has never existed and cannot ever exist, because it is a quite impossible pipe-dream. It is a deception and a fraud. See the Refuting Marx page for the details.
I submit that it is quite impossible for anyone who holds to Marxist ideology, in any form, to honestly swear in any oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, because anyone who holds to Marxist ideology, in any form, is, a priori, an enemy of the Constitution of the United States. Everything in Marxism opposes the American Constitution as written. That is why I recommended that we find a way to Outlaw Marxism in America, even if it takes a special Constitutional Amendment to do it. Marxism will destroy us from within, if we allow it to continue as it is.
Anarchism is an extreme form of a twisted and perverted interpretation of Liberty. Anarchy seeks the end of all authority, because it sees authority as an obstruction to personal liberty. Anarchy may be the penultimate stupidity of all stupidities. Like the Marxist, the anarchist seeks a classless, private-property-less existence of total equality among citizens, recognizing only the sole authority of pure democracy, in which everyone votes on everything. A good example of a pure democracy would be a lynch mob.
I submit that the typical anarchist is the deceptively manipulated useful idiot of the Marxist revolutionary, to be used to destabilize society and bring about crisis, and then to be killed or enslaved by his Marxist exploiters in the resulting “restoration of order” that is in truth just another “revolutionary” take-over.
Democracy that is unrestrained by a Constitution cannot last, and may present the most deceptively sly ideological menace to the Constitutional Republic of America. Pure Democracy cannot stand for long. Alexis de Tocqueville knew this, and he wrote about it in his 1835 book Democracy in America. This was the first, and perhaps best, great analysis and description of the unique form of American greatness and American exceptionalism ever done. But in it, he warned of the dangers of the slide from Republicanism into Democracy, and what the result would be. Let me quote:
”The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.”Today we see that happening. The Democrat Party moves us away from Constitutional Republicanism and deeper into Democracy, making more and more citizens dependent upon them rather than dependent upon themselves, and increasing the size, scope, reach and cost of government every step of the way. Democracy is an important stepping stone in Marxism’s march to eventual revolution and dictatorship. Marx himself knew of this fatal flaw in pure Democracy; he and other champions of Marxism would exploit and capitalize on it to the utmost.
Democracy is the road to socialism. --Karl Marx.The public champion of the purest Democracy always appears to be the champion of the individual citizen; looks can be deceiving. These are wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Social Justice issues emanating from non-Constitutional sources nudge our sympathies more toward the slide into democracy, and even into Marxist redistribution, in the name of social “fairness.” An example might be The Four Freedoms developed by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and quoted in the Political Ideologies page. Freedom of speech; freedom of religion; freedom from want and freedom from fear. There’s nothing wrong with the first two; they’re in the Constitution. But, freedom from want? Even if you tried to establish it in law as a citizen right, there is no way the government could provide it. And who, besides the government, should be responsible to see to it that no one ever wants for anything? Of course, freedom from fear is just plain stupid.
Nevertheless, FDR was hugely popular, and these four freedoms were enshrined in many American hearts. Norman Rockwell, a truly great American artist, created four beautiful paintings illustrating the four freedoms, and the freedom from want painting may be one of the most famously known among my generation, and our elders. It shows the American family gathered round the Thanksgiving Day dinner table, with dad carving the turkey. Like the other three, it is beautifully done, and it is absolutely heartwarming. No matter how beautiful the thought, want cannot be eliminated by any law, or any legally established right, because rights and responsibilities come in paired sets. A right to something requires a responsibility to satisfy the right. There is no worldly entity, including the American government, capable of ensuring that no one will ever be in a state of want. It’s another pipe dream ripe for exploitation. It is exploited by Marxists. Remember always that universal redistribution can only result in universal impoverishment, which means, precisely, universal want.
The United Nations’ Declaration of Human Rights is far, far worse than FDR’s Four Freedoms. As we said in the Politial Ideologies page, it establishes such things as equal pay, retirement pay, unemployment pay, sick pay, child care pay, compulsory education (which includes political indoctrination), all, and more, as absolute human rights, with the corresponding responsibility of government to supply them. It’s another pipe dream exploited by Marxists. It is designed to alienate the citizen from his government, make him unhappy with his situation and make him antagonistic to the status quo. That is to say, he is becoming a potential revolutionary, without even knowing it.
The Saving of the Planet from “unenlightened” men, being done by “enlightened” men, may represent the greatest conglomeration of propagandized hoaxes and frauds ever exploited by Marxism. This is the notion that man needs to save the planet from – well, from man. It’s ridiculous on its face, but, here we are. We talked about this in the God and Nature page. May the Lord God preserve us from the enlightened, modern, secular, highly educated, sophisticated elites, including all of TTRSTF, who are certain, certain, that man desperately needs to save the planet from man.
Man must save the planet from man, but which men? Saving the planet cannot be trusted to just any men; the saving must be done by the sophisticated elites, in action against all those less sophisticated men who are endangering the planet. See? Man saving the planet from man is lie piled upon lie, hoax piled upon hoax and fraud piled upon fraud. It begins with the ancient, time-warn, easily disproved Population Problem hoax, still believed and pushed by enlightened, modern, secular, highly educated, sophisticated elites, including all of TTRSTF who are convinced that we need to reduce human population. Not the population of themselves, of course – but the population of other men. (It’s a tough job, but somebody has to do it.)
There’s the acid-rain hoax; the ozone-hole hoax; the running-out-of-natural-resources hoax; the running-out-of-food hoax; the anthropomorphic-global-warming hoax, etc., ad infinitum, many if not most of which are elaborated upon in the Eco-Nazi Front page. All are fraudulent; all are being exploited by Marxism. That’s just another way of saying that all of them are supported and pushed by the enlightened, modern, secular, highly educated, sophisticated elites, and all of TTRSTF.
Man saving “society” from man is another branch of the same lunacy. It includes fraudulent movements playing on mass-sympathy to promote such things as pure Democracy or even Marxist Redistribution over Constitutional Conservatism. Marxism needed to create straw-man villains in classless America, and the main ones became Big Oil; Wall Street; Jews; Big Banks; Corporations; White People; Defense; The Military; The Rich; Christians; The Christian Religion; Misogynists, Homophobes; Conservatives; and, of course, Republicans.
The worst in this category involves less and less concealed, more and more open racism expressed against Caucasians, including open public profiling. In any incident between races, the white is assumed a priori to be the offending party. So-called Black Leadership has morphed into a very lucrative career path for those with the talent to keep minorities feeling angry, hostile, disenfranchised, alienated and opposed to assimilation into the larger culture. Incitement to riot or even open race warfare is a major goal, which makes the whole movement ripe for Marxist exploitation as another avenue to create crisis, and crises, the more and the bigger the better. It should not surprise you to learn that the greatest numbers of anti-white racists in America are white. No kidding. Guilt-ridden Left-leaning whites, mal-educated, propagandized and agitated in rabidly racist anti-white and fraudulent anti-American history, anxious to prove how they are enlightened, will support any law, regulation, riot or lynch-mob, so long as it opposes someone who is white.
Agenda 21 and “Sustainable Development” programs of the United Nations are part of a global strategy aimed at achieving eventual world domination by the UN in a New World Order. In the very deceptive public, published strategy, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction. Agenda 21 capitalizes on and grossly exaggerates every single man must save the planet from man hoax spoken about above. Agenda 21 is a pure Marxist drive to world redistribution, weakening of any proper sense of sovereignty and nationhood, centralized political power and international, global control of man.
In the The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet event described in Earthpress, 1993, the planners are quoted saying “Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on Earth.” And, “ … it calls for specific changes in the activities of all people … And, “Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced … ” See? They just want to save the planet from us. Or maybe they want to save us from us. Or maybe they want to save themselves from us. Perhaps “we” didn’t see ourselves as any kind of threat to the planet, or to ourselves, or to others; but then, perhaps we are not enlightened, modern, secular, highly educated, sophisticated elites, like all of TTRSTF who understand such lofty ideas so much better then we, the lowly hoi polloi.
Some 178 nations signed on and adopted Agenda 21 as official policy at the so-called Earth Summit, with George H. W. Bush signing for the USA. Billary Clinton created Executive Order #12858 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development to push the UN’s Agenda 21 in America. He directed all agencies of the Federal Government to work with state and local community governments in a joint effort to “reinvent” government using the guidelines outlined in Agenda 21. As a result, with the assistance of groups like ICLEI, Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county and state in the nation. It is now in your neighborhood, and in your local schools, pushing from the bottom up.
Foreign entities that are not representative of us, not accountable to us and not subject to our Constitution – like the UN and the World Court – seek to weaken and eventually eliminate all world sense of sovereignty and nationhood, in the movement to a New World Order. It is vitally important for American Citizens to know, or to re-learn, that here in America the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land. No foreign entity, even with the blessing of any American Presidents, should ever be allowed to super-impose any unrepresentative and unlegislated new law or authority or power over us and over our own Constitution without our consent. If it does not represent us, if it is not properly legislated here, if it is not in any way accountable to us, then it has no business interfering with us in any way, let alone taking charge of us.
Islam is, at its very root, diametrically opposed to American Founding Principles as well as American Constitutional Principles. The Koran itself demands and requires its disciples to oppose, even by war, the very idea of America. If you wish to go to the Koran and prove or disprove that statement, remember to apply the Islamic theological tenet that whatever Mohammed said last holds authority over whatever he said earlier. The “nice” verses, concerning especially the “people of the book” were written in Mecca. (Mohammed said these prior verses were inspired by Satan; Salmon Rushdie wrote The Satanic Verses about them, thereby earning himself an Islamic death sentence issued in absentia.) The “kill the infidels” verses, concerning especially the “people of the book” were written after the flight to Medina and the birth of Islam. These are the verses that stand, according to Islamic religious teaching, abrogating earlier verses. Let me quote from the Definition of Islam page:
” … then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. – Koran Sura 9:5.The term “idolaters” is referring to us. Note that this sort of thing is illegal here in America; we call it murder. Here’s another one:
Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection. – Koran Sura 9:29.I don’t know about you, but I don’t care to be in any state of subjection to Islam. Forget the relatively minor thing we call freedom of religion; Islam opposes life itself, human liberty, the pursuit of happiness – quite literally everything America stands for and every principle she is founded on. Islam is an alien ideology that has no proper place in America.
After devastating military defeats in world history, Islam morphed into an insidious and parasitic long-term strategy of conquest from within, rather than an open use of large armies and military force. Slow growth from inside the host nations, mixed with episodic random acts of terrorism, has become the decisive strategy. Islam is a theocracy; a radical combination of religion and civil law, in which the religion is the fraudulent mask of peace. ”Islam is a religion of peace” is a flagrant lie. Islam is a religion of war. The Moslem in your neighborhood is only a smiling, friendly neighbor until their numbers are sufficient for them to take over. One little piece of the world at a time, one neighborhood at a time, until the time is ripe. Some of the peaceful Moslems are true dupes – manipulated and exploited useful idiots – not unlike so many convinced and believing Marxist ideologues. They are the unthinking products of ideological propaganda and mal-education.
Islam is, at its root, a political fraud; it is a long-term strategy aimed at eventual world domination, while deceiving followers into believing that it is a drive toward the perfection of man, the perfection of society, and the achievement of utopia – man-made heaven on earth. That utopia – a Caliphate, which is to say a conquered world in submission to Islam – is in truth just another form of the oft dreamed of world dictatorship. It is a deception and a fraud. See the Refuting Mohammed page for the details.
I submit that it is quite impossible for anyone who holds to Islamic ideology, in any form, to honestly swear in any oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, because anyone who holds to Islamic ideology, in any form, is, a priori, an enemy of the Constitution of the United States. Everything in Islam opposes the American Constitution as written. That is why I recommended that we find a way to Outlaw Islam in America, even if it takes a special Constitutional Amendment to do it. Islam will destroy us from within, if we allow it to continue as it is.
American Constitutional PrinciplesStill standing “evolutionary” violations of the Constitution.
The Progressive Movement, which seeks to include societal-improvement through government sponsored social-benefit programs, requiring a massive expansion of federal government scope beyond Constitutional limitations, was given birth under President Theodore Roosevelt. The Progressive goal is the improvement of society, through the improvement if not the perfection of man by man. Shall we say, the Progressive seeks the improvement of unenlightened man, by enlightened man. Whether Progressivism was or was not initiated by Marxism, it certainly was (and still is) capitalized on, exploited and controlled by Marxist ideology later. The greatest advances of Progressivism over the restraints of the American Constitution occurred under Woodrow Wilson, and were greatly built upon by Hoover and FDR, where America experienced the greatest expansion of government power over the people in all of American history, up until the inauguration of Comrade Obama (peace be upon him.) Progressivism has been building to this point for over a hundred years.
The Graduated Income Tax was brought to us under Woodrow Wilson in Amendment XVI, ratified in 1913. Until then, taxing income was unheard of; and a graduated income tax, which is, by design, purely redistributionist, germinated from the original seed planted by Karl Marx in his Communist Manifesto. The graduated income tax is an original idea of Karl Marx. In America, it marked the beginning of the political demonizing of the most successful in life as “The Rich” and the political sympathizing with the least successful in life as “The Poor” and/or “The Working Man.” Politically motivated and instigated class warfare in America would only escalate from there.
Amendment XVI needs to be repealed. We need to pass the Fair Tax to replace it; we could use the Fast-Track the Fair TAx method to set the income tax rate to zero, with a sunset-clause, to get the Fair Tax operative before the Amendment is repealed, which should take about a year, judging by how long it took many other Amendment processes to be completed.
The Popular Election of Senators was brought to us under Woodrow Wilson in Amendment XVII, proposed in 1912 and ratified in 1913, which abrogated major parts of Article 1 Section 3, and the last clause of Article V. Amendment XVII moved America closer to becoming a pure Democracy rather than a Constitutional Republic. Democracy was seen by Karl Marx as a major stepping-stone on the social “evolutionary” path to Socialism and dictatorship.
Progressivism aims to gain power over the people, through the people, just as Tocqueville warned in Democracy in America. It increases the ability of the whole Congress to use tax payer money to buy votes; it also increases the ability of the populace to vote for representatives who will give them more benefits. As the people become increasingly addicted to benefits, more dependent and less independent, the politicians who produce those benefits grow more politically successful. It’s a double-whammy political move toward pure Democracy and eventual economic collapse, followed by dictatorship.
Amendment XVII needs to be repealed. We need to go back to Article 1 Section 3, in which Senators are selected by their state Legislatures and thoroughly insulated from popular vote. We were not designed to be a Democracy. When asked by citizens what they had produced after the closing of the first Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin responded:
”A Republic, if you can keep it.”
The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was signed into law by Woodrow Wilson. The original idea of a centrally controlled national banking and credit system came straight out of Marx’s Communist Manifesto. The Fed was authorized by law to issue Federal Reserve Notes – U.S. Dollars – in an un-Constitutional delegation of government power to coin and print money, and to artificially set interest rates. As you can see in the Federal Reserve page, the Fed actually caused the huge banking catastrophe of the depression era and contributed mightily to the great depression itself.
This law needs to be repealed. America had and has no need of any centralized banking and credit system, no need to be artificially setting any interest rates, and no need for any unaccountable, unrepresentative, politically insulated bureaucrats in charge of American treasure. The Fed and its officers have proved to be a danger to the American and world economic systems.
Separation of Church and State is perhaps the most egregious example of Judicial Activism America has yet experienced. It was a pure invention. No such wall of separation existed in law or in the Constitution before the 1947 Everson case. Justice Black, writing for the majority, boldly reinterpreted the word Establishment in the religion clause of Amendment I to mean, also, Aid, and Support. The clause says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;That simply means that Congress is prohibited from establishing any official American national religion, and from interfering with any citizen’s free exercise of his own religion. Any 7th or 8th grade student should be able to understand that simple English clause. If I had t guess whether the Black Court was stupid or evil, I would have to go with evil. Social opposition to religion in the West was born, again, in Marx’s Communist Manifesto. The fraudulent “Constitutional” Principle of Separation of Church and State has been used as a political bludgeon with which to beat Christian religion completely out of the public sphere and out of open public expression, in clear opposition to the Religious Exercise clause. Go to the Separation of Church and State page to see the gory details of how this Constitutional travesty came to be in America. There you will see that President Thomas Jefferson actually did the very things Justice Black, in his decision, said that the American government was Constitutionally prohibited from doing. Justice Black was just making it up as he went along.
Congress needs to overturn this “Principle” via legislation, because it is, precisely, New Law. Making New Law is the exclusive domain of the Congress, not the Court. This was a major breach of Separation of Powers, and an overreach of the Court in making a new law, and fixing it as a Constitutional Principle, when in fact it never was and still is not in the Constitution itself. Congressional legislation needs to either set aside the decision entirely, or somehow negate and nullify the legal precedent that it set. There is no such Constitutional Principle as Separation of Church and State.
Court Abortion Decisions represent another egregious example of a supposedly Constitutional Principle being established via Judicial Activism; another New Law, unlegislated, unrepresentative, created exclusively by the Court. We provided a lot more detail on the history of it in the Abortion in America page; go there for the details. A train of decisions led to the Court un-Constitutionally overturning legislated state law in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, all at once. It began with a case in 1961 called Poe v. Ullman, which was dismissed by the Court, but Justice Harlan wrote a dissenting opinion from the losing side. This losing-side dissenting opinion contained words regarding an invasion of privacy; an invasion of privacy had never occurred, this was just some wording he used. Try to follow me here.
Using that losing-side dissenting opinion invasion of privacy wording as a legal precedent, Planned Parenthood pressed the case of Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965, in which decision Justice Douglas wrote his infamous
” … specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.”decision in which he invented a Constitutional right to privacy. See? Then we had the 1973 cases, Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, in the same time frame. In Roe v. Wade the Court decided that the newly invented Constitutional right to privacy allowed a pregnant woman to privately make the decision to have her developing child, in the womb, medically killed and extracted, like a tumor, in the first trimester of pregnancy. A doctor could not be prohibited by state law or any law from committing abortions if it might infringe on the woman’s right to privacy. Then, in Doe v. Bolton, the Court decided that medical abortions could be committed for women’s health reasons, which opened it up entirely. If the woman didn’t feel good while pregnant, she could get an abortion. And here we are.
Congress needs to overturn these “Principles” and these “precedents” via legislation, because they amount to, precisely, New Law. Making New Law is the exclusive domain of the Congress, not the Court. This was a major breach of Separation of Powers, and an overreach of the Court in making a new law, and fixing it as some sort of Constitutional Principle, when in fact it never was and still is not in the Constitution itself. Congressional legislation needs to either set aside these decisions entirely, or somehow negate and nullify the legal precedents that they set. There is no such Constitutional Principle as any right to privacy or any right to abort babies. The federal government has no business even addressing such issues; they are not in Article 1 Section 8, and they are therefore outside the established and enumerated powers of the federal government. These were and remain state issues.
Extra-Constitutional Federal Government. This addresses all the areas of government law, taxing, control, regulation, etc., that are not enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution.
Where to begin?
Education. Welfare. Social Security. Medicare. Medicaid. EPA. FDA. BATF. IRS. OSHA. The list is endless. On and on it goes. The federal government has no Constitutional business even addressing these areas. There is way, way too much to address here. See the American Political Ideologies page, and all the pages linked in the right hand column of that page. (Some day I’ll finish them all.) Most all of them have their conceptual ideas taken right out of Marx’s Communist Manifesto, and they are not only un-American, they are anti-American. They are all the products of American Progressivism.
They all need to go. We don’t need to spend anywhere near what we are spending to pay millions and millions of petty bureaucrats who are doing un-Constitutional things with our money at the federal level. Our federal government should be very small, and very simple, and very cheap.
Progressives and their now dependent constituency among the public will say that Conservatives want to poison the air (as if Conservatives didn’t need to breath) and poison the water (as if Conservatives didn’t need to drink) and big business wants to kill all their customers (as if big business didn’t need to prosper), and on, and on, and it’s all nonsense. They will say that we want to starve the poor; but go take a look at the record of Communism, if you want to see starving people. You won’t find them here.
Violations of the American Constitution by Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) and friends :
Article 1 Section. 6. in part:
Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) appointed then sitting Senator Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State, increasing her emoluments.
Article 1 Section. 9. in part:
The United Nations is a foreign entity. Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) personally took chairmanship of the UN Security Council in the normal rotation instead of allowing the American Ambassador to the UN to accept the position, as would be normal. It is well worth noting here that the UN is not only a foreign entity, but one that is openly hostile to America and to American interests; indeed, the UN is almost as hostile to the USA as it is to Israel. Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) and others of his ilk hope one day that the UN will become the super-bureaucratic entity to be used by a dictator to rule the future New World Order that will come into being when the American Constitution is no more.
GM and Chrysler bail-out: The original TARP bill was passed in a rush, explicitly to bail out banks that were deemed “to big to fail” during a false “financial emergency” that was ginned-up for strictly political purposes. It could easily be argued that TARP itself was unconstitutional. After the rush to pass it and sign it into law, the Democrats changed their minds and illegally used some of those TARP funds, which were very specifically legislated for banks, to bail out GM and Chrysler to avoid bankruptcy. Then, bankruptcy occurred anyway (as planned?), and reorganization took place, not via any bankruptcy court, but personally directed by Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) who took direct charge of and personally directed the corporate reorganization. In this action, the federal government took 61% ownership in GM, deprived corporate bond holders of their private property without due process and without equal legal protection, and gave that “taken” private property to Democrat Party-supporting unions and others. This was a direct violation of Takings and of Due Process. They also took on a seemingly permanent leadership role in managing the formerly private business affairs of GM and Chrysler.
Dodd Frank: The Dodd-Frank “financial reform” created a new bureaucratic power that could operate in secret, without oversight, with unlimited power over the entire private banking industry. The Treasury Dept may now, suddenly and without warning, seize banks and other financial entities deemed by them to be “unsound” and “too big to fail.” The new bureaucracies (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; Financial Stability Oversight Council) can “regulate” new law as they and they alone see fit, and they may execute it on their own. Dodd Frank is a glaring example of violations of the Constitutional Principles of Separation of Powers, Due Process. and Constitutional Restraints on government. Dodd Frank was legislated and signed during a period when the Presidency, the House and the Senate were all under the absolute domination of the Communist Party. I mean Democrat.
Racially selective and unequal law enforcement. During the 2008 election, at a polling place in Philadelphia, members of the racist group the Black Panthers menaced, threatened and intimidated voters standing in line to vote, in a glaringly obvious case of voter intimidation caught on camera. After election and inauguration, Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) ordered his Attorney General Eric Holder to not pursue the case and not prosecute any such cases in which the perpetrators were black and the victims were white, in direct violation of the principle of equal protection under the law in Amendment XIV. The law was directed by the President to be enforced differently and very specifically unequally for members of different races.
Elimination of National Borders. Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) refuses to provide for the common defense or to repel foreign invaders in accordance with Article 1 Section 8, and Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution. He has not and will not secure our border with Mexico. Open warfare and beheadings of American citizens along the border are going on, largely unreported by the Obamunist-dominated SLIMC. If not for talk radio most of us wouldn’t even know about it. When Arizona passed a border law that is a virtual duplicate of the federal law that is purposely not being enforced, the federal government filed suit against the state of Arizona to keep it from defending itself or any other part of America against armed infiltration and invasion by hostile Mexican drug gangs and other illegal crossings. Iranian-backed elements of the Islamic terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah are now known to be allying with the Mexican gangs, and, from the viewpoint of Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) that is good; it is another opportunity for another crisis or group of crises to form. All Marxists and all revolutionaries need crisis, the bigger and the more numerous the better.
Obamacare. The very idea of Socialized Medicine is unconstitutional. Obamacare is based on a false premise – that citizens have a legal right to equal health care (or health care insurance) and that the federal government has a responsibility to supply it. There is no such legal right, and there is no such government responsibility. Compared to other human needs of life, such as food, for instance, medical care and medical insurance are the much lesser human needs. A citizen can go a very long time without medical care, but he cannot live for very long at all without food. The beginning premise is false. If it were true, then we should entertain the idea of an Obamafood program first, since food is more critical than medical attention. Or, perhaps Obamahousing, which is also more critical than health care; if people don’t have shelter, they will soon succumb to exposure to the elements. This is nonsense. Neither medicine nor medical insurance are listed in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution; the federal government has no legitimate business involving itself in these activities.
Legislative Abuses and Trickery. This so-called “bill,” which was “deemed” to have passed, never should have become a law. It never was a properly constructed bill in the first place. A House bill called Affordable Health Care for America Act was passed along Party-line votes in the Democrat dominated House, and Nancy Pelosi sent it on to Harry Reed in the Democrat dominated Senate. The Senate, however, ignored it; the Senate used another totally unrelated bill previously passed on by the House, HR 3590, regarding housing breaks for service members, having nothing whatsoever to do with health care.
The Senate totally revised HR 3590 to make it the Senate version of Obamacare, a complete and total rewrite. But, while the Democrats dominated the Senate, they couldn’t prevent filibuster, and Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska threatened filibuster if the newly created bill required funding for abortions. Nelson was won over to support the bill with a promise (which was false) that abortion would not be federally funded, and with the infamous Cornhusker Kickback deal, in which Nebraska was exempted for three years from paying into the Medicaid expansion mandated on all states; an obvious bribe. (That wasn’t the only one; there was also the infamous Louisiana Purchase and the Florida Flim-Flam; you can look them up.) The federal government would pay Nebraska’s share of the state mandate for three years. Without further filibuster from Ben Nelson, it passed the Senate and was sent back to the House. This was clearly unequal treatment before the law.
With this entirely new bill back in the House, while efforts were begun to come up with a bill both Democrat houses could live with, Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) submitted a third Democrat version to be considered. The House was then presented with the problem of developing one acceptable bill out of three. The result was a gigantic hodge-podge of language no one could understand. Abortion funding was, of course, back in the mix; this was, after all, a Democrat bill. The decision was made to pass the predominantly Senate version of the bill with a bunch of amendments, and send it back to the Senate, thereby allowing them to further amend it via an unrepresentative legislative trick called the reconciliation process. However, there were still enough Democrats in the Democrat controlled House who opposed abortion funding to prevent House passage. Led by Bart Stupak, they insisted on language prohibiting federal funding of abortion. Rather than changing the language, Comrade Obama (peace be upon him) signed executive order 13535 promising (falsely) to include the Hyde Amendment in the bill, thereby prohibiting abortion funding, and winning over Stupak and the dissenters. So the bill passed the House and went back to the Senate.
Back in the Senate, Republican Scott Brown had won the Kennedy seat from Massachusetts, giving the Republicans sufficient numbers for the ability to filibuster and block the bill. But, Harry Reed and the Democrat majority were prepared for that, and they sent the bill into secret negotiations in the reconciliation process and the appointed reconciliation committee approved all amendments without need for a full vote, or any filibuster, or any public discussion, or anything at all before the full Senate. This procedure was supposed to be reserved for emergency budget problems to reconcile the budget. Once reconciled, the bill went quickly for an immediate up-or-down vote with no discussion allowed. They did it in a surprise session very late on Christmas Eve. It passed, and was quickly signed into law, and, of course, it contained federal funding for abortions. The Senate had appointed a special committee of administrators, and illegally and unconstitutionally delegated to them the full Senate’s sole authority and responsibility to properly develop and legislate law.
Even with a Democrat President, a Democrat controlled House and a Democrat controlled Senate, Obama, Pelosi and Reed could not possibly have properly passed this bill without resorting to extreme measures including trickery, deceit, lying and even bribery. They had to deceive and trick their own political Party to get it done.
Commerce. A really weak and poor argument made in support of Obamacare is that it is supported by the Commerce Clause in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, to wit,
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
That’s the Catch-All clause Progressives always try to use to legislate beyond the scope of legitimate Constitutional restraints. However, that clause only allows federal involvement in international and inter-state commerce. Insurance cannot be sold across state lines. If you purchase insurance, it must be from a company that resides in the state in which you live. There is no interstate commerce here. Obamunists and Progressives of both Parties might argue that a beneficiary with insurance in Ohio might get sick and be treated in Florida, which adds an interstate aspect to it; however, the beneficiary and the insurance company are both from Ohio. The relationship between any insurance company and any health care provider is another contract. Obamacare is trying to force the citizen to buy insurance, and that is the “commerce” issue here.
The Mandate. Under Obamacare, all citizens are required by law to pay for participation in the health insurance program. At first, while actual private health insurance companies still exist and operate, this law means that the private citizen is to be forced by law to sign a contract, which is what an insurance policy is. A compulsory contract is not a contract, by simple contract law. A legal contract requires two willing participants. If it is not voluntarily entered into by both parties, there is no contract. This idea predates the Constitution; it is common law, possibly predating Charlemagne and the Magna-Carta. If both parties don’t willingly shake hands, there is no contract.
Putting aside, for the moment, the obviously flawed notion of the compulsory contract – a contradiction in terms – there is a very serious problem with the federal government forcing any private citizen to buy any product or service against his will. That’s not what the American federal government was constituted to do. It violates the national founding principles of liberty and the pursuit of happiness enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. It is a radical interference with the free market that automatically comes into being when a people enjoy the rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is a movement toward a planned and controlled economy, which is to say a Socialistic government rather than our Constitutional Republic. It strikes at the very heart of America as constituted. If the government can force the citizen to buy something – anything – against his will, then the government is all powerful and the citizen is enslaved. This is the exact opposite of the intention of the Framers.
The Tax question: Obamacare supporters argue that the mandate is a tax; but the mandate requires this “tax” to be paid to private insurance companies in return for insurance coverage. It can only be a tax if it is paid to the government. Obamacare supporters also argue that the penalty to be paid by the citizen who violates the law by not paying for the insurance premium is a tax, rather than a penalty. But if it is a tax, then everyone must pay it, including those who obey the law and pay the premium payments. The whole tax argument of the Obamacare supporters is just too stupid for words.
IPAB (Independent Payment Advisory Board), popularly known as The Death Panel, consists of 15 Presidential appointees who are tasked with “reducing Medicare spending” by exercising governmental authority and power to deny Medicare claims. All IPAB decisions are, in effect, law, which can only be overridden by three fifths majority in the Democrat-controlled Senate. No published guidelines, no external review, no congressional oversight, no judicial review, no public notification of rules, no opportunity for comment … no escape from it. The IPAB will decide, entirely on its own, whether you will receive treatment or not.
IPAB proves that there is no longer any need for Congress; nameless, faceless, unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats will now legislate and execute our law for us, at the direction of Comrade Obama (peace be upon him.) We are no longer to be governed in the old American way; we are to be Administered, by the personally appointed administrators of the Emperor. This is a radical violation of Separation of Powers and the principle of Representative Government, via un-Constitutional delegation of governing authority to unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats.
Amendment X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Medicaid Expansion coerces states to participate in a radical expansion of the Medicaid program, else lose all federal Medicaid funding and be cut off entirely. This illustrates what happens when a state (or a citizen) becomes dependent on federal funding for any given program; soon, the “benefactor,” which is to say the federal government, will begin to direct you on how to spend that money, and/or what you must do to continue receiving it. This is a direct migration of power from the states to the federal government, and violates the spirit and intent of the 10th Amendment. It illustrates why no state ever should have accepted “benefit” monies from the federal government, and why no citizen ever should have accepted any federal or state government “benefit.” To become more dependent is to become less independent. It is addictive, and addiction is weakening.
As the Secretary shall determine … The 2,700 + page Obamacare law is replete with instances of illegal and unconstitutional delegation of legislative and executive authority and responsibility, from the Congress and from the Executive branch, to the appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services. The Health and Human Services Secretary is an appointed, insulated bureaucrat, who is unelected and unaccountable to the citizens. Obamacare as written contains over 700 places where the Secretary “shall take action,” some 200 more where the Secretary may “issue regulations” and an untold number with phrases such as “as the Secretary shall determine” or “as the Secretary may decide.” Before passage, then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi famously said “We need to pass it to find out what’s in it.” Well, now it’s passed, and we still don’t know what’s in it. Only the Secretary knows, and whatever the Secretary knows today is subject to change at any moment in time.
American Constitutional PrinciplesAmerica’s Constitutional Future.
What happens to Constitutional America next depends in part on if we make it through the next election and to the next inauguration, and perhaps a year or two after that, without a serious national crisis, or a perfect storm of national crises, allowing opportunity for direct takeover of America and elimination of the Constitution altogether, under the guise of restoring order. The most serious threat to American national survival that I see at the moment involves the recent merging of Marxism and Islam in the interest of global destabilization, which operates to the benefit of both of them. It is a near mirror image of how Nazism and Islam united in WWII. The fact that they will one day oppose each other again is irrelevant at the moment; they both follow the adage The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend, and they both follow the Machiavellian dictum The Ends Justify The Means
We need to take control of the Republican Party and somehow rid the Party of all the “Establishment” types in control positions in the Party, and make it a completely conservative, pro-Constitution Party. The Tea Party awakening has stimulated the Constitutional conservative majority in America that should form the Republican Party base of voters. America has always been conservative, but Americans have not always been paying attention. Now, I pray that this situation has their undivided attention.
The biggest problem that infects so many American voters is the Marxist ideology infecting public education, the Marxist ideology infecting university education, and the Marxist ideology infecting the entire field of American journalism. It makes the typical Democrat voter anti-American without even knowing it. They are propagandized practically every moment of their lives. Look at the Professional Liars of Journalism page, and all the article links in the right hand column of that page, for the clear evidence of how the SLIMC lies to us every day of our lives.
The typical dedicated Democrat voter has been dumbed-down to the point that he really believes that there is no difference between the two Parties, and no real difference between any politicians – they are all corrupt; they are all playing political games. The fact is, the conservative interprets the Constitution as written, and the liberal interprets the Constitution as it suits him. That’s the true picture. But many in America actually believe that both sides interpret the Constitution the way that they want to interpret it. The so-called liberal Justices on the Court do not like the Constitution; they would like to change it, or even eliminate it. The four conservative Justices on the Court try to interpret out of the words the meaning that the Framers intended; that’s what conservatism does. The remaining “independent” swing-vote Justice on the court lacks the firm ideology or perhaps the firm set of principles required to consistently support the simple English words of the Constitution. Like the “independent” voters, he lacks the moral fiber and the proper ideological purity required to always seek ultimate truth. He swings first this way, then that.
This way of thinking in America may be America’s biggest danger. The “base” forming the Democrat Party’s most dependable voting block is primarily made up of the most truly, truly stupid and inept voters in America. They will always vote Democrat, no matter what. The fact that they are a minority may be offset by the fact that the Democrat Party will cheat in an election, any way they can. They know that they will always have the base. Conservatives outnumber liberals and independents combined; but the “cheater” vote cannot be counted with accuracy. We cannot hope to convince the Lefties and the independents; we need to defeat them, in sufficient numbers even to offset Democrat cheating. What is needed is a return to truth, and a spreading of the truth.
The Founders who signed the Declaration, and the Framers who signed the Constitution, were home-schooled men. Abraham Lincoln, before he was President, was a home-schooled practicing attorney of law. What were his qualifications? Well, he was a moral, highly principled man who could read. Those three qualifications, in that order, were all that was needed. I submit that Lincoln was better qualified to practice law than many if not most practicing attorneys today. The difference might not be the length and quality of the current legal education as much as the cancerous infection of anti-American propaganda embedded in general education today.
We all receive our official education today from enlightened, modern, secular, highly educated, sophisticated elite educators. Secular is the key descriptor, or at least the most important one. The Secularist scrubs God and religion out of what he teaches. Morality comes from religion. Outside of religion, there is no moral code that makes sense. Atheistic Marxism says the ends justify the means, and that’s about it, as far as any moral code.
When you take God out of the picture, you take morality out of the picture. In the absence of morality, there are no fixed principles permanent and important enough for a man to be Principled about. No more Lincolns; no more moral, highly principled man who can read. In the absence of God, there is a sort of vacuum. What, exactly, do you suppose might come in to fill that void? The Framers followed the moral code that comes out of the Judao-Christian Ethos. The man who rejects or curses religion eventually winds up following the moral code that comes out of BMDFP and Marxists. They cannot be of our national ethos; they cannot, because they lie. You show me a Marxist and I’ll show you an ends-justify-the-means liar.
We, the people, need to return to seeking, finding and knowing truth.
And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one who dose evil hates the light, and does not dome to the light, lest his deeds be should be exposed. But he who does what is true comes to the light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wroght in God. – John 3:19-21.Keep it simple.
Seek the Truth; find the Way; live the Life. Please God, and live forever.
Do not reply to this automatic email.
Respond to this article at the link below :
This article and comments may be found on the web site at the link below:
Visit Vic Biorseth on FaceBook at the link below:
|Back to Back Issues Page|