Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 10:46 — 9.9MB)
When talking about the Constitution as the Founders and Ratifiers gave us, there tends to be two primary viewpoints – those that are in favor of strict limitations on federal power, and those who want those limits obliterated.
Stereotypes in our society generally separate those views by political party support – or even voting habits. People who vote Democrat are generally considered the ones who look at the Founders’ vision as old, outdated, or simply something that gets in the way of their political plans. Republican voters are generally seen as the ones who want smaller government, and the ones who cite the Constitution as justification for that reduction in federal power.
But, many people argue, individual Republican supporters often favor policies that are just as unconstitutional as their Democrat counterparts. They are many who have favored things like the Real ID act, the patriot act, indefinite detention, war without congressional declaration, and much more.
In my own experience over the years, I’ve often noticed a difference in how these two “sides” respond to Constitutional arguments. In talking with Democrats about federal actions they oppose, they’ll readily get on board with a viewpoint that the act in question is unconstitutional. But, when they favor it politically, it takes quite a bit more. And, often times, when providing a pretty convincing argument that the act is in fact unconstitutional, the response is generally something like this – “OK, sure. It’s unconstitutional. But why do we need to be stuck in a period two centuries ago. Those old white guys couldn’t have envisioned our needs for today.”
Basically, it all gets down to a political viewpoint. Use the Constitution when it supports those view, and trash it when it doesn’t.
On the other hand, in talking with Republicans about federal actions they oppose, they’ll also readily get on board with a viewpoint that the act in question is unconstitutional. And when they favor the act politically, it also takes quite a bit more explanation. Where I’ve personally experienced the greatest difference in responses is when providing a convincing argument that a Republican’s favored political program is unconstitutional. I can’t think of a time where I’ve heard that the Constitutional limitation should be ignored because it’s old, or because those “dead white guys” wrote the document. Instead, I have generally heard arguments like this. “Yes, I agree that the founders left marriage rules to the states. So we should amend the Constitution and make that a national issue!” Or, “OK, now I understand the PATRIOT Act issue constitutionally, and I really shouldn’t have been in favor of it when Bush was in office. But I’m not going to vote against Obama over this one issue – we’ve got to get him out of office!”
In general, I can understand these positions, even if I don’t agree with them. At very least, when nationalizing something, I’m hearing from these folks that a Constitutional mechanism should be used in some cases.
And, when learning that a favored program is unconstitutional, I’m getting less resistance to it, even when actions are taken which will perpetuate it.
While this isn’t a great success, it is a slight improvement. But, lately, I’ve noticed a new approach becoming popular, that’s just as bad, or worse. This viewpoint can be summed up no better than by this comment, from Paul in North Carolina:
“You are ensuring the enslavement of America thanks to your ‘purism’. Face facts and realize we must oust Obama.”
So let me get this straight. It’s us – the ones who want to follow the Constitution, who are the bad guys? It’s not the people who’ve given us nationalized education, nationalized health care, nationalized retirement funds, nationalized agricultural laws, and more. It’s the Constitutionalists who are now the enemy to republicans like Paul.
For Paul, I guess he doesn’t care about Republicans who paved the way for Obamacare with Medicare Part D. He doesn’t care about Republicans who paved the way for “Indefinite Detention” in America by setting it up and practicing it at Guantanamo Bay. He doesn’t care about the massive growth in food stamps recipients under Obama as a result of Republicans voting in favor of expanding them under Bush.
He doesn’t care about much, I guess.
For Republicans like Paul – and on the other side, like the “Peace President” who bombs people, extends the patriot act, and keeps guantanamo bay open – principle means nothing. Only winning does.
But, for them to say they want to “save America,” is this delusional? I think so.
Every election, we hear from people that the president must be ousted or “we’re all doomed.” But yet, there’s never been a presidential election in modern times that has brought this country anywhere closer to the Constitution. Not one.
Become a member and support the TAC!
The sad fact is this. America, as the Founders set up, was dead and gone long before Barack Obama or George Bush ever took office.
So, like Paul, if all you care about is your team winning, then yes, Constitution supporters are the enemy. And we are certainly that enemy to both Democrats and Republicans. Why? Because both sides have shown a complete disregard for the Constitution for a long, long time.
But, it doesn’t really matter to me if we’re their enemies. And, like John Adams so wisely wrote,
“Many of the ablest tongues and pens, have in every age been employ’d in the foolish, deluded, and pernicious flattery of one set of partisans; and in furious, prostitute invectives against another: But such kinds of oratory never had any charms for me. And if I must do one or the other, I would quarrel with both parties, and with every individual of each, before I would subjugate my understanding, or prostitute my tongue or pen to either.”
Bam. Enough said for me.
You should crash the next debate @RonPaul_2012
You overlooked neopolitics, which is everything after 1800. We are a bicameral system unto a parliamentary democracy via Britain’s repatriation commencing with the Democratic party and every new political, domestic and economic enterprise forward.
Two choices: constitutionalist or progressive, which the later is the deception everyone loathes and debauchery that gets them there. Neopolitics, which encompasses both parties at this point, is a paradox. It’s not doing quality. It’s doing entertainment, charisma and a slick Willie act administration to administration, and it’s on the shoulders of Americans to figure this out, because they elected these sociopaths too lazy to vet them before voting, or they just didn’t vote.
Republicans and democrats have thus been lost to repatriation leaving the US in the hands of constitutionalists and progressives who are hiding out with their investment portfolios, the former in the US, and the latter in the EU, hoping this will not touch them personally. Value of gold has sky rocketed. Congressional income is for life. Why rock the boat?
And then there are writers pretending we still have a bicameral system oblivious to a presidential debate where there are only two candidates represented, both neopoliticians and therefore representing a UK parliament by proxy, and neither one of these standing ground on constitutional issues surrounding their fraud by default and with the idiot public largely divided between them, according to MSM polls.
Twilight Zone. You survived (Enough said for me) after the BAM!
I’ve pretty much been saying the same thing,I’m actually losing friends over it. Because I refuse to get on board with Romney. But I can give sound arguments for not supporting either of these 2 corrupt parties. I actually posted about this on my facebook page, I’ll repost it here as well.
Why Romney And Obama Won’t Debate Gary Johnson:
I keep hearing that a vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for Obama. I keep hearing that a vote for Johnson will just get us four more years of Obama. Well here’s a few questions for my detractors. Why should I have to check my principles and my conscious at my polling precinct door? Instead of people like me who do vote on principles like freedom and liberty having to hold my nose and vote for the slightly less crappy version of the two socialists running. Why don’t you all join with us for a change? Why has it always got to be the other way around?
And you can bet the farm that if Romney does lose, we’ll get the blame for it. Well I contend that the blame needs to go to the people that DIDN’T vote for freedom. What if everyone who likes the sound of freedom and liberty actually voted that way for a change? Yeah, what if…..
We’ve been trying this same exercise in futility for the last 100 years or so. Where has it actually gotten us? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result. The only difference between the 2 major parties these days are this. One thinks it can manage and control every aspect of our lives for us because we’re too damn dumb to do it for ourselves. The other thinks it can do a better job of managing and controlling our lives. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!
Ultimately the people were to be the fail safe to prevent the demise of the Constitution but the Founders still should of put more checks, and balances in. Some way to prevent Corporatism from infesting government. Naturally our lazy dumbed down populace is responsible for the demise of our Republic.
@Admiral America The Founders provided US with a) Article III Section 2 (the Exceptions Clause) and the 11th Amendment to check the Court, b) judicial review to check the legislative and executive branches (subject to Art III §2 and the 11th), and with c) a “Republican Form of Government” so that We the People would forever have a check on the representatives entrusted with OUR power – every election cycle.
So, where did things go wrong? Is it fair to blame the Founders, or the People?
@zbrugman @Admiral America I’m thinking neither. I think it lies with the central banksters and the Bohemian Grove/Illumnati bunch…
@bizrsc1 @zbrugman Only Congress has the right to print our currency. There should be no private central bank printing it at interest. We don’t need a middle man weasel to have money. Corporatism is the real enemy. All these secret organizations, and the wealthy elites wouldn’t have any power if their banks, and corporations didn’t have deep influence within the government.
@Admiral America @bizrsc1
Yes, but how do the wealthy elites wield their power in government — and thus usurp the power of the People? Is it the representatives who are to blame for handing the keys of our government of, by, and for the People, over to the wealthy elites? Is it the Court? Both?
Is there a source or access point where wealth infests government?
@zbrugman @bizrsc1 It was an incremental corruption of the election system. Vetting of corruptible candidates who would not only be in debt to major contributors but also do the bidding of the Republican-Democrat party establishments. Some are peer pressured into corruption once in office as well. Once there they can change laws to benefit the wealthy elites corporations, and banks. They can appoint evil people to non-elected positions that they give way too much power to. Many in the executive branch were major players in large corporations. I think we need to reform our election process. I’d like to see something where anyone with a high school diploma could enter a pool of people. Every average American should be able to serve in government. Then a group of them are randomly chosen for us to elect from. There should also be an end to election donations. The person with the most money shouldn’t be elected. The taxpayers would pay for the election with everyone getting the same amount of money to run, and the candidates would also have no political party affiliation. This would prevent the influx of slick corrupt corporatist weasels into government.
@zbrugman @Admiral America @bizrsc1 By the SSO debauchery pledge with threat of death in perpetuity for redaction. The Mormon church is notorious for this method, by the way.
@zbrugman Both. Founders should have put more safeguards against corporatism which is why our government is corrupt, and out of control. However I’m not sure if corporations were a big issue back then. Most people think there’s nothing wrong with the mega corporations whose products they buy the most. There’s also the private Federal Reserve bank that most don’t see as a threat and don’t even realize it’s a private bank that prints our money out of thin air at interest to the taxpayer.
@Admiral America @zbrugman The founders prohibited the Vatican from organizing in the US, hence corporations not yet thought of as such a that time were regarded with disdain, because they enslaved people to theocratic/despot policy making the constitution was created to throw off.
Corporations can be brought under control if they can be subordinated to the constitution. They don’t, and they rule the day by funding politicians favorable to corporate interests mitigated by progressivism, palingenetic ultranationalism, neopolitics and occult rendition.
The key to overcoming these circumstances is voting constitutionalist only, no progressives, until the house and senate are once again under the control of the people. You think we have problems now, if Obama gets re-elected, guess who’s going to the supreme court: Eric Holder!
Good article, but where do you get the notion that “the Founders left marriage rules to the states”?? The Founders were Christians and even those who were deists would never have said that marriage under God was ever ANYTHING but between a man and a woman! Thos. Jefferson had strong things to say about homosexuality, so your statement is a HUGE misconception and distortion of anything the Founders would ever have stood for!
@bizrsc1 I would imagine because there’s no mention in the Constitution regarding the sanction of marriage that I’m aware of. Hence, it would be left to the states under the 10th amendment.
@Patrick Henry Actually, there is. It speaks of the “laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” that is the law of God which is the Bible and the Ten Commandments. The Bible is VERY clear that marriage is between one man and one woman, and never anything else.
@bizrsc1 Quote for me then please, the Article and section of the US Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to sanction marriage.
@Patrick Henry Here is an excerpt from a website that addresses that issue clearly and comprehensively.
”
INTRODUCTION
An examination of the true foundation of American law must begin with the question: “Is the law of God supreme or is it subject to the laws of peoples and nations?” Two answers to this question are possible. The first answer is that God exists and his law, including his laws pertaining to the creation of nations, governments and constitutions, are supreme, right and absolute. The second answer is that whether or not God or his law exist, the law of peoples and nations, are supreme, right and absolute at least until they are changed.
Ascertaining the requirements of any law – human or Divine – requires people to make judgments about what the rule of law is and what that law commands. It requires people to understand the sources and foundations of law.
This essay explores the sources and foundations of American law. The thesis of this essay is that the essential American legal principles of equality, rights and government by consent, are derived from the laws of God, articulated in the Declaration of Independence under the general appellation of the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” and incorporated into the various state constitutions and the federal Constitution. This essay briefly surveys the laws of nature and of nature’s God as that law was first expressed in Creation and then verbalized in the Declaration’s text and the Constitution’s clauses.
It is hoped that as a result of this examination and survey, the basic outline of God’s law of Creation as it has found expression in the American legal and constitutional context will plainly emerge. The emergence of such an outline will enable students of law generally, and of constitutional law specifically, to begin thinking in terms of the law of God with an eye toward reinvigorating the true foundations of American law and government.
WHAT ABOUT THE BIBLE?
As one might expect, the Bible is fairly clear on the subject of the supremacy of God and his law. It indicates that there is no God except the Lord God.1 God is the God of creation and He is the Creator of all things visible and invisible.2 God impressed his laws upon creation and he governs its operation accordingly.3 God gave his law so that people would seek after God and know what God requires of every person.4 Of course, the laws of God are right, perfect, and eternal.5 They apply over the entire globe and are written in God’s creation because God is the Creator of all the earth.6 These rules also apply to all people and are written within each man, woman and child because God is the Creator of all people.7 God also reiterated the basic elements of his rules of right and wrong in the Bible.8
The implications of this situation are straightforward. Since God created all things, he also has the right to rule them according to his laws.9 He rules the nations according to his laws.10 His laws rule the nations irrespective of whether a given nation believes in God or recognizes his laws.11 This does not mean that the nations are perfect nor does it mean that people who do not worship God cannot rule.12 Nor does it mean that God will judge lawbreakers according to our timetables of justice.
It does mean, however, that God will not let a corrupt government rule forever.13 God judges justly on the earth and punishes lawless leaders and nations.14 Nations which forget God may completely perish.15 Nations which honor God and try to follow his laws, however, can expect to receive his care and protection.16″
The rest of the article may be read at:
http://www.lonang.com/conlaw/1/c12a.htm
@Patrick Henry Here is another article that deals with the position of the Founders with regard to homosexuality.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=7&article=1126
Excerpt:
The Founders on Homosexuality by Dave Miller, Ph.D.
Of those living today in America who were alive 50 years ago, few could have imagined, let alone predicted, that homosexuality would encroach on our culture as it has. In fact, it would have been unthinkable. The rapidity with which homosexual activists continue successfully to bully the nation to normalize what once was universally considered abnormal is astonishing. And toleration has not satisfied them. Allowing their views to be taught in public schools has not appeased them. No, they insist that societal endorsement extend to redefining marriage to include same-sex couples.
A pernicious plague of sexual insanity is creeping insidiously through American civilization. Far more deadly than the external threat of terrorism, or even the inevitable dilution of traditional American values caused by the infiltration of illegal immigrants and the influx of those who do not share the Christian worldview, this domino effect will ultimately end in the moral implosion of America. Indeed, America is being held captive by moral terrorists. The social engineers of “political correctness” have been working overtime for decades to restructure public morality.
The Founding Fathers of these United States would be incredulous, incensed, and outraged. They understood that acceptance of homosexuality would undermine and erode the moral foundations of civilization. Sodomy, the longtime historical term for same-sex relations, was a capital crime under British common law. Sir William Blackstone, British attorney, jurist, law professor, and political philosopher, authored his monumental Commentaries on the Laws of England from 1765-1769. These commentaries became the premiere legal source admired and used by America’s Founding Fathers. In Book the Fourth, Chapter the Fifteenth, “Of Offences Against the Persons of Individuals,” Blackstone stated:
IV. WHAT has been here observed…, which ought to be the more clear in proportion as the crime is the more detestable, may be applied to another offence, of a still deeper malignity; the infamous crime against nature, committed either with man or beast…. But it is an offence of so dark a nature…that the accusation should be clearly made out….
I WILL not act so disagreeable part, to my readers as well as myself, as to dwell any longer upon a subject, the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature. It will be more eligible to imitate in this respect the delicacy of our English law, which treats it, in it’s very indictments, as a crime not fit to be named; peccatum illud horribile, inter chriftianos non nominandum [“that horrible sin not to be named among Christians”—DM]. A taciturnity observed likewise by the edict of Constantius and Constans: ubi fcelus eft id, quod non proficit fcire, jubemus infurgere leges, armari jura gladio ultore, ut exquifitis poenis fubdantur infames, qui funt, vel qui futuri funt, rei [“When that crime is found, which is not profitable to know, we order the law to bring forth, to provide justice by force of arms with an avenging sword, that the infamous men be subjected to the due punishment, those who are found, or those who future will be found, in the deed”—DM]. Which leads me to add a word concerning its punishment.
THIS the voice of nature and of reason, and the express law of God, determine to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance, long before the Jewish dispensation, by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven: so that this is an universal, not merely a provincial, precept. And our ancient law in some degree imitated this punishment, by commanding such miscreants to be burnt to death; though Fleta says they should be buried alive: either of which punishments was indifferently used for this crime among the ancient Goths. But now the general punishment of all felonies is the fame, namely, by hanging: and this offence (being in the times of popery only subject to ecclesiastical censures) was made single felony by the statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 6. and felony without benefit of clergy by statute 5 Eliz. c. 17. And the rule of law herein is, that, if both are arrived at years of discretion, agentes et confentientes pari poena plectantur [“advocates and conspirators should be punished with like punishment”—DM] (1769, 4.15.215-216, emp. added).
@bizrsc1 Look, I’m with you my friend, homosexuality is a sick twisted perversion IMHO. But what you’ve offered up here isn’t from the Constitution. I asked for a direct quote from the Constitution that gave the feds the authority to sanction marriage. You can’t, because it doesn’t exist. It just isn’t there and furthermore, if you’re willing to accept oversteps of the Constitution that you agree with. You have to also be willing to accept the ones you don’t agree with. If you want the federal govt. to define marriage as being between a man and woman. The Constitution would need to be amended to reflect such.
@Patrick Henry I do not think that death is the proper response of the state to this sin, but those practicing such sin do “receive in the body the due penalty for their sin,” in any case, the laws of God never change, regardless of the state’s response to it.
As to the changing of God’s laws to positively allow the state to endorse homosexual marriage, however, the Bible makes clear what the result will be; it will be the destruction of that nation. This crosses the line of God’s mercy and tolerance and brings the nation into certain judgment of God.
Yahweh’s perfect law or bust! (Psalm 19:7-11)
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to Yahweh’s moral law (His commandments, statutes, and judgments). Take our Constitution Survey at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/constitutionsurvey/constitutionsurvey.php and receive a free copy of the “Primer” (an 85 page book, normally $7 plus shipping) of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.”
Problem is that the majority of todays people have no knowledge of truth, they reject Yahweah and his standards and you have a mixture of so many conflicting doctrines and tolerance for evil.
Yahweah may bless thee, O habitation of justice, and mountain of holiness.
Isaiah 59:4: None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.
Gen. 18.19
For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of Yahweah, to do justice and judgment; that Yahweah may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.
@RobertAlexander Truth is a close cousin of the lie. Remember I said that.
@gypsynovus
O you sons of men, how long will you be slow to hear? Why do you love vanity, and seek falsehood?
I would have no need or benefit to care that you said that.
O Yahweah rebuke me not in Your wrath, neither chasten me in Your anger.
Why would I care what a servant of satan administers in his church?
For behold the sinners have bent their bow, they have prepared their arrows for the quiver, to shoot secretly at the upright in heart.
Yahweah my strength and my shield; my heart trusted in him, and I am helped: therefore my heart greatly rejoiceth; and with my song will I praise him. Save thy people, and bless thine inheritance: feed them also, and lift them up for ever.
@RobertAlexander Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu…
??The Constitution is not the answer to today’s (or any day’s) issues. The author, in making the statement about “marriage being left to the States”(to define it however they will) is instructive here, when it comes to zeroing in on the Constitution’s weakness. The Constitution, implicitly, if we take the author’s marriage assertion at face value, allows states to define marriage as between a man-and-a-man, woman-and-a-woman, man-and-a-sheep, and so forth ad nauseum. God, however, utterly condemns sodomy and bestiality as acts worthy of the death-penalty. Thus, the Constitution, on this issue (and many others as well) blatantly thumbs its nose at God’s Law and allows “the People” to live by laws other than the Law He has declared and decreed. Constitutionality is, therefore, an alien law-order that is, at its core, hostile to God Almighty and must be denounced as such. Forget amending the Constitution, let’s ditch it(as most of the politicians have done, for all practical intents and purposes, anyway) and turn in repentance to the One True God, obeying and keeping His altogether righteous Law.
??
“Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” (Matt 28:19-20)
@John Englehutt This is wrong on so many levels, which I will reply to later when I have more time. This sounds like the response of a closeted liberal. The Constitution, Dec. of Independence and the Founders were abundantly clear on all of these points, as I indicated above. Turn to God in repentance, yes, and have your eyes opened to our Founding, true history and the original intent of the Puritans, Pilgrims, Magna Carta, Dec. of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights. Any 7th grade Civics student in the 60s could decimate your flawed arguments.
@bizrsc1 @John Englehutt What the framers said at any given point proves nothing, particularly with Matthew 7:21-23. The level you will have to demonstrate Mr. Englehutt incorrect is on whether the Constitution stands up to the only standard by which it and everything else must be ethically judged–that is, Yahweh’s morality as codified in perfect law and altogether righteous judgments (Psalm 19:7-11).
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to Yahweh’s moral law (His commandments, statutes, and judgments). Take our Constitution Survey at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/constitutionsurvey/constitutionsurvey.php and receive a free copy of the “Primer” (an 85 page book, normally $7 plus shipping) of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.”
@TedRWeiland Critical thinking question for you, TRW.
The earth is an estimated 4.54 billion years old. Since it was produced from solar ejecta during a Sun cycle, this means the inner planets are younger and Mars is older.
There are four outer planets, all gas, which implies two different cycles in which both the outer and inner planets were formed.
Setting the mark of Earth’s age at approximately 4 billion years with it’s current distance form the sun, how old is Mars? Also, how old are Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune?
The bible can’t answer these questions, but calculus can. The bible wasn’t designed to do this. It was engineered to mystify your mind so you wouldn’t ask questions like these and would automatically condemn others who learned to do this. The God of the bible is a mushroom, and this same God produced Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny and Alice and wonderland. Go ahead and look it up. This is the reason they are trying to control the internet so you can’t learn about this and what a fraud literature the bible is.
The individuals who wrote the bible (Conucil of Nicaea) knew about solar ejecta and how the planets were formed long before science explained this to modern man, and even then this narrative was dumbed down to confuse you. They worship the sun, because they know this is where we come from, but they keep people like YOU in the dark so they can cultivate you as a slave and your children for ritual sacrifice.
People who think don’t enslave well. Masses that think aren’t easily controlled by the Elite (Cathars). People who preach and teach the bible are petty tyrants, and they share this mission with corporate models who encourage them not because they are morally correct, but because they proxy for greater tyrants to whom they subordinate their flock (Romans 13), even when those greater individuals kill children for entertainment.
I find your willingness to act the part both unsettling and an attempt to aggrandize your otherwise flat ego at the expense of others who are using this message board for educational purposes. I’d go as far as to say your real name, which I know, but that would spook people po this site.
Wrong on so many levels? I think not.
It is easy to hide behind claims that the Constitution is a Christian document or that the Founders were Christian men, but both assertions are highly, highly questionable AT BEST. Our Lord said “by their fruits ye will know them”, and we have to apply that standard to the Constitution and the men who framed it. The fruit of the Constitution is that it introduced an alien law-order, where man-made legislation was given place to supplant God’s revealed Biblical Law. That’s a FACT, and it would take willfull blindness to argue otherwise. The point I made on marriage as it relates to the Constitution (namely, that it can be defined any way the people decide, despite the fact that God has plainly decreed what marriage is in His Word) is but one simple illustration that I am sure, as you put it, “any 6th grade Civics student in the 60′s could understand”.
As for calling me a “closet liberal”, that is just plain rude and without any factual basis. I respectfully submit, rather, that it is you and those who hold to Constitutionalism above what God has decreed in His Law, who are the true “liberals’.
@John Englehutt Christ returned in 1844. see bahai.org. Click on Selected writings and read the Scripture from Baha’u'llah, founder of the Baha’i Faith, and the return of Christ and the 12th Imam. I’ve done my homework, now you should do yours, or live in ignorance forever.
@John Englehutt Easy to speak, but actions in alignment are a tougher REALITY walk. Living and proclaiming truth may or will get you killed in one fashion or another – verbally or literally.
Now whom would OPPOSE truth but an adversary ?
Really, think about that.. and remember Jesus sad: “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”
Are YOU the reader an adversary to Yah and his Word, do you work to make NULL his laws, statutes & judgments IN ANY WAY ? any, any and I mean any tolerance for less than the fullness of Yah’s written word IN HARMONY – is allowing leaven into the camp.
I John 24 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
Now AGAIN I ask you:
Whom would OPPOSE truth but an adversary ?
Jesus said:
“I am the way, the truth, and the life”.
People DO wake up – I have seen it and I believe in the last moments of Earths timeline, there will be a rapid speeding up of this process – but until then I see the same grind.
People usually wake up slowly – or SOME in an instant and they react one of two ways – with acceptance or with adversity to revealed truth, & more latter than former.
Fact is, when you have equity in your heart, you will weigh out the balance in truth for truth.
Remember, ”I am the way, the truth, and the life” and remember the speaker of that quote Yah in the flesh was whom we call Jesus – PERFECT – & “Without Sin” – His MORAL Righteousness was “HOLY” - Whom would oppose Jesus & call him a liar but an adversary?
If you keepeth not his commandments, the truth is not in you. You then have a different perspective – you have then judged the law and HAVE set yourself up above God… keeping alive your PERSONALIZED lusts and idols – yes as the bible says “made with your very hands” – you have a world view to sell me and I won’t buy it.
Most people will allow their world view drive / guide their “antiChrist hearts nose ring” to the slaughter of mankind. Completely willing to take a nose dive into the hard core reality of destruction for they love the lie rather than humility in that drug laced cookie of error which leavened their whole lump seeking to expand it’s existence with enthralling fervor.
Talk about What AMERICA could become if only 10% of her Christians had equal dedication and fervor for their King the living Christ Jesus – that One & Only Savior Yahweah who came in the flesh.
In fact I’d say it’s probably possible with 3%-7%, the stumbling block is their block heads, that granite neck, those molybdenum hands and STINKY feet no oil can cure.
Many professing Christians will receive a related fate:
Then will I pluck them up by the roots out of my land which I have given them; and this house, which I have sanctified for my name, will I cast out of my sight, and will make it to be a proverb and a byword among all nations.
If we had King Jesus as our Head, a little Holy Spirit will move mountains. But the bottom line is unless someone is at the head of a Nation – starting with families and communities expanding outward with Yah’s LAW rightly being measured out – how will we get Gods HANDS upon us for good.
It Takes READINESS of heart, within a submission of our flesh to the law as a lamp to teach us unblemished equity.
We don’t need to weed out every clump of tares, as we prepare for the desired harvest – THAT will come.
The ground must first be ready (love truth above all else in humility – be broken – to yield fruit – desire to die to self) – there will be trials, fire, drought, life and divine intervention to rest, work and cleanse thy lands – and people are O ye Lands – made from the Dust After All.
Coming from Babylon a workman ready:
Ezra 7:6: Ezra himself hath come up from Babylon, and he is a scribe ready in the law of Moses, that Jehovah God of Israel gave, and the king giveth to him–according to the hand of Jehovah his God upon him–all his request.
SPAM
@John Englehutt The bible is a fraud literature. Vatican of Nicaea 325 AD. Druid mystery works which exalts necromancy and BDSM mitigated ritual human sacrifice. It was never written for the masses. It was designed to be the operating manual for for the elite to control their subordinates, and ritual sacrifice has always and continues to be a part of it. They are fading the bible now in favor of legislation which permits same, which is acculturation to occult rendition. We come from the sun. We are the product of solar ejecta which forms planets, our particular form of life highly rationalized but nonetheless predatory for survival like everything else on this planet. there are two opposing forces, atramental and those seeking reason. Both are monsters, albeit the latter is the lesser of this. When people learn to think and become more willing to take responsibility for their own lives, the former will be hard pressed to live among them. For the time being, people aren’t currently thinking and remain largely mystified and thus controlled by their atramental masters, and Atramental Lodge 23 is proof of this.
@gypsynovus Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
@John Englehutt Yeah well, the bible is one way of looking at it if you like fantasy literature where the characters talk back at you through the lenses of mushroom glasses. Also, 264= additive sum 3, which is the 5 and 7 lobed oak leafs and sacrifice victims featured in this Gemini inspired BDSM mysticism.
@gypsynovus You clearly have nothing of substance to argue, so I’ll let my above allusion to Proverbs 26:4 stand.
It’d kinda wobbly looking, but whatever.
@gypsynovus @John Englehutt Oh boy, here we go!
= )!
@gypsynovus
Ethan has this to say in response to your bizarre allegations:
“What evidence have you that the bible is “fraud literature”? (Nicaea 325 didn’t establish cannon.) What evidence have you that druids influenced the texts? A multitude of passages demonstrate the books were to be distributed to ALL the faithful. What you call “control” is in reality a lamp to chase away the atramental. In what way do we “come from the sun”? What process do you allege took place? I agree there is light and dark, evil and good, but you appear to exalt yourself above both. There is a Master of the “masters”, the One you call a mushroom. He is indeed withdrawing Himself and His blessing from this land. He said He would do so through Moses in Deut. 28. Set the shrooms down and read it.”
@John Englehutt John, you need more information to challenge me to an argument on CON. The bible is fraud literature, although I don’t dismiss it entirely out of mind, because the writers, high as they were, did a beautiful job of describing quality human character in Jesus, just he was made up.
We come from the sun as the product of solar ejecta where the earth was 4.54 billion years in the making. There was a process of mitochondrial migration from Mars what planet having gone through the zone of life produced biological organisms that having found their way to earth’s oceans picked up where they left off before Mars lost it’s atmosphere and water.
It’s likely Mars underwent transmigration at the same time it was struck by a meteor, possibly several, which partly accounts for the variety of life on earth.
A cursory guess on the age of Mars is close to 6 billion years, inner and pouter planets 12 billion years through two sun cycles, each lasting approximately 6 billion years.
Our solar system is the product of the sun’s release of nuclear material which congealed into a planet, accumulated scatter debris during the cooling process and eventually and naturally evolved carbon based life form, hence you and I. In this way, we come from the sun.
I think you’re spooked by my knowledge. I study this stuff constantly, so I am current with science, although you will not fined this information except open source, because it is coveted as occult.
YOU not knowing this makes it easy to control you with the bible, which this is what this literature was designed to do, except it was written for your masters to use to mystify your thinking rather than you have possession of it directly.
The stories were examples of how to organize people around false flag crisis and occult protocol. They knew about the sun and our origin, but they didn’t want YOU to know about this, because having this knowledge empowers you to think. They can’t control you if you can think for yourself.
The mushroom I a was referring to is fly agaric. Go to Joe Rogan (genius) for more.
I never heard such foolishness in my life. But, let me be clear: nothing you have said “spooks” me. You are merely an anti-Christ–one of many–who has bought into the great lie of Satan, as described in Genesis, namely: “Hath God said?” The voice of the tempter has won you over and you now openly challenge the Word of God, Creator of Heaven and earth. It is unsurpassing arrogance on the part of any man to challenge God’s Word, which is precisely what you are doing in calling the Bible a fraud. Unless you repent, your part is with the Devil and his angels in the lake of fire(see Revelation). And that’s all. I won’t try to convince you any further, for God declares that
“The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.”(Psalm 19:1) and, more relevantly,
“the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because THAT WHICH MAY BE KNOWN OF GOD IS MANIFEST in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are WITHOUT EXCUSE:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 18:19-22)
Professing yourself to be wise, as with this whole false notion of man coming from the sun billions of years ago, you have BECOME A FOOL, and there is no reasoning with a fool.
I pray only that God will lift the darkness out of your heart and show you the error of your ways before it is too late. His will be done.
Otherwise, you may wobble on your own poorly-constructed worldview foundation until you fall into the pit of eternal darkness, but my Christian brethren and I will stand on the Word of the Lord God Almighty, whose Word ALONE IS TRUTH. No argument you can construct, no “science” or cobbled up theory you or other anti-Christs can cook up, can make the least bit of difference, for we rest in the promise of God trhough Abraham that He is our “shield and exceeding great reward”(Genesis 15:1).
@gypsynovus @John Englehutt YOUR bible BEST or BUST and let all the chips RIDE.
We know you have zilch, but will be interesting to see a reply with integrity and reason from the TEXT (Scripture itself) so please take a month to weigh your sales pitch out to get it right.
If you can figure out what this means, then you have fully researched scripture to make a legal determination; 6 ¶And the kinsman said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance: redeem thou my right to thyself; for I cannot redeem it.
Sorry – I won’t accept any gibberish or ranting.
@John Englehutt Overcoming paranoia takes time. Be patient with yourself.
@RobertAlexander @John Englehutt
You are moralizing on a fantasy, which is psychotic. You’re also dismissive of debate, which means you’re a progressive. These two are one and the same. Thank you for the example!
Also, your force of will is adolescent, and your paedomorphic preoccupation with “scripture” points to a vocational impediment to the ability to reason.
Authentic morality appears to be difficult but not impossible for you, but to do this you have to formulate your perception of the difference between right and wrong on some standard of personal value rather than sign post literature that curtails same.
In other words, you have to learn to take risks and responsibility for your ideas less trying to shield yourself from error with your hokey bible.
@gypsynovus @John Englehutt Confirmed SPAMMER and not worth ANYONES time.
@gypsynovus@John Englehutt
O ye simple, understand wisdom: and, ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart.
What’s your trip, RA. People disagree with you and you are all over them with righteousness? Stop acting like a dick. Be FLEXIBLE!
@gypsynovus
“Take care what you hear. With what measure you measure, it will be measured to you, and that with interest.
Matthew 7:2: For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
@RobertAlexander Piss off.
@gypsynovus Young adolescent please understand that I have vastly more experience than you dreamed ever achieving, and that turds don’t disturb me but TRUTH makes boys like you QUAKE in their shoes… so run along to a crowd that sees value in your lunatic rantings and leave the men alone.
Proverbs 8:
1 Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice?
2 She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths.
3 She crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors.
4 Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of man.
5 O ye simple, understand wisdom: and, ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart.
6 Hear; for I will speak of excellent things; and the opening of my lips shall be right things.
7 For my mouth shall speak truth; and wickedness is an abomination to my lips.
8 All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them.
9 They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.
10 Receive my instruction, and not silver; and knowledge rather than choice gold.
11 For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it.
12 I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.
13 The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.
14 Counsel is mine, and sound wisdom: I am understanding; I have strength.
15 By me kings reign, and princes decree justice.
16 By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth.
17 I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me.
@RobertAlexander There ya go. Ya pissed off like you were told. You’re workable!
@gypsynovus @RobertAlexander A LIE as expected from the heart filled with deception. And thank you for the opportunity:
Proverbs 9:
1 Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:
2 She hath killed her beasts; she hath mingled her wine; she hath also furnished her table.
3 She hath sent forth her maidens: she crieth upon the highest places of the city,
4 Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither: as for him that wanteth understanding, she saith to him,
5 Come, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled.
6 Forsake the foolish, and live; and go in the way of understanding.
7 He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot.
8 Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.
9 Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser: teach a just man, and he will increase in learning.
10 The fear of Yahweah is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.
Answer me this thou with the tiny IQ – what on earth do you feel you can accomplish with your attempts at pestering me? O yeah that’s right you can’t comprehend to even think that far – so let me get to the point – you should at least be intelligent enough to have a goal in mind… start with the TRUTH if you can even find any of it… or do you not believe in absolute truth?
Stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant.
But he knoweth not that the dead are there; and that her guests are in the depths of hell.
@RobertAlexander This is getting weird, isn’t it?
@gypsynovus
The lips of the righteous feed many: but fools die for want of wisdom.
You have a need for the balanced wisdome of Gods word to be fully delivered to you.
When you’re ready in humility to look at truth, then start to search it out with integrity.
As the whirlwind passeth, so is the wicked no more: but the righteous is an everlasting foundation.
@RobertAlexander Yep, the whirlwind passeth, hopefully.
It will pass. And the wicked no more.
Isaiah 28:16: ¶Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
II Timothy 2:19: Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, Yahweah knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.
Ephesians 2:20: And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
Geez Louise! What’s with all the theological wrangling? This is an article about the limits placed on the General Government and modern political maneuvering of both parties to avoid being held down by these limits. I for one am glad that none of your theological statements will make any difference to the way in which this nation is run. Obviously, separation of church and state is a great thing.
@MatthewBradyCulpepper Separation of church and state… Fucking Satanist run the White house. Separate that! Are you not pe le eling attention? The constitution isn’t w-o-r-k-i-n-g. The constitution is off line. S1867.1021?
We’re falling back to argument on morality and ethics, because that’s where sanity is. You kind of have the thesis correct, but you are out of your mind if you think this is going to work itself out in a debate forum between politicians. Obama himself has been telling people if you don’t like what’s happening use the constitution to stop it which he then attacks with a myriad of progressive legislation to circumvent same. Healthcare reform?
In reality, if we were doing the 10th on this article, much of our discussion would focus there. Not happening, because the nature of progressivism is to delimit and push the window on boundaries in service to palingenetic ultranationaliasm, which in reality competes with meaningful discussion on the bill of rights globally.
You won’t get a meaningful discussion on the 10 here, yet, because people are all over the map on their political views, the only thing in common among them being some kind of culture club clique where they start licking one another’s asses thinking they are doing something bold for the constitution.
What’s your view on the 10th and how this applies to this article, genius?