Constitutionalist or Not: That Is the Question
Conservative or liberal: what does that mean any more? It is definitely difficult to say since many a conservative supports what amounts to a liberal position on some issues while liberals lean toward and support more of what amounts to socialism. There are those designated “far left” who are still considered liberal but support out right communism. Moreover, many conservatives are dubbed “right wing extremists” when taking a Biblical, constitutional view of issues in our republic.
However, regardless of where any label attaches itself to your lapel, first and foremost, we should consider ourselves constitutionalists. The Constitution for the United States of America declared this confederation of sovereign states a republic. It is the Constitution that sets down the limits of the three branches of the central (federal) government created by the people and the States. This is the first and highest authority in the republic. Yet, time and again, many proclaimed conservatives and liberals fail to acknowledge this document as the authority over government. Representatives elected to the House and those individuals in the Senate have the obligation to uphold, protect, defend and support the Constitution, even taking an oath to do so.
So, why, if we are loyal to the Constitution, are there any labels at all save for one – constitutionalist?
A multitude of answers could be given in response to this question. Many would make sense while some would not. Everyone has their theories. But, more or less, it comes down to “party platform” or the public’s perception of party platform. These days, it is difficult to distinguish between a Democrat, a Republican, a RINO, a liberal, a corporatist, a statist, a conservative, a socialist or a communist since the “parties” are filled with individuals proclaiming one of the ideologies listed. Elephants and donkeys mean little when each side is filled with “anti-constitutionalists.”
Truly, the only two designations in this republic fall under either “constitutionalists” or “anti-constitutionalists.” Any other designation is putting lipstick on a pig. Citizens of this nation either support the constitution or they do not – no picking and choosing. If we in this republic support the Constitution, why would anyone sign any document stating loyalty to vote along party lines regardless? Why would allegiance be given to a “party” and the platform over the Constitution? This is a question better left answered by “party” proglodytes.
As this weekend celebrates the proclamation of independence of the colonies from the English monarchy, many will attend events, parades, fireworks shows, and engage in barbeques and backyard forays. This writer is no different. I took my niece and nephew to Georgia’s Stone Mountain Park for the Laser show Spectacular and the Fourth of July Fireworks event. It was breathtaking – filled with salutes to the armed services and the Coast Guard, a rendition of the Star Spangled Banner and a group participation in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
Amid the cheers for the different service branches and celebrating what is Americanism – freedom, one could not help but recognize the irony. Thousands of individuals gathered on terraces and the Memorial Mall cheered for freedom, independence and the United States of America without realizing they were throwing it all away with both hands. When the image of the Declaration of Independence flashed across the carving of Jefferson Davis, Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, and Robert E. Lee, cheers erupted, but the meaning of the document, as the framework for our republic’s form of government, lost on the masses.
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
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. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordlingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security — …. – The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.
How can I say the meaning was lost among the masses when cheers erupted?
If the meaning were truly comprehended, individuals would realize these statements were as true today as they were when written in 1776. Just because “we the people” created a republic governed by the Constitution does not mean it is automatic or the created government, consisting of fallible men and women, would continue to honor the founding documents. As is stands today, there is very little the created governments – local, state and central, are honoring from the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the united States of America.
The individuals elected to serve “we the people” and the court system no longer recognize God-given unalienable rights that preceded government and refuse to protect our sovereignty. Instead, government determines what “rights” that the people are to “enjoy” at their discretion. If any God-given unalienable right interferes with government, government seeks to abolish it, restrict it, or eliminate it, thereby violating the very document that limits government – The Constitution for the united States of America, and usurping the power of the creator of government, the people.
No longer is American culture, which is the right to freedom and liberty where government protects individual God-given rights and citizens are equal under the law, celebrated but reviled, replaced with the idea of multiculturalism. The idea that many cultures can exist in one geographical area without conflict has supplanted the singular culture of freedom and liberty. It is a move toward “globalization” heralded by professors, some members of the clergy, and supposed “enlightened ones looking toward the future” where individual God-given rights are a threat to “the collective.”
Thomas Jefferson declared this republic to be the first established by the force of reason and not an accident of geography. It is the idea that freedom, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are rights given by God and protected by government. Radical for the time, this self-evident truth, echoed in the Constitution, rocketed our republic to the “exceptional” status in the world. Individuals all over the globe clamored to the shores of this republic to enter in order to become naturalized citizens and bask in the light of freedom and liberty. American citizens expected those coming to our shores to accept our culture, follow our laws, embrace our language, and enjoy the land of freedom. Individuals immigrating into the united States, in the past, embraced and defended these ideas considered radical.
Now, many Americans are no longer defending and embracing those ideas. Individuals entering this republic are not expected to assimilate. If American citizens are not willing to defend the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence and hold the government created to the Constitution for the United States of America, how can one expect those entering this republic to do the same?
How many American citizens know what the first shots of the American Revolution were fired in opposition to? Here’s a hint – it is an unalienable God-given right the government is trying to eradicate from the people.
That’s a broad hint since there are almost none of the original Bill of Rights left intact in this republic that has not been trampled upon or ripped apart by the government “we the people” created to protect those rights. Our sovereignty, delegated to the creature government to protect, is being given away to the highest bidder.
So, here’s the big question. How can one proclaim to uphold, defend, protect, and support the Constitution for the united States of America and declare allegiance to a “party” at the same time? How can one declare that what is ordained and given by God as “outdated” or “a relic of the past?” What God has given – freedom, liberty, life, and all other rights – is timeless and as relevant today is it was yesterday or in the beginning.
How can one celebrate “independence” from despotism and a tyrannical government as they march lock-step to the tune of the drum of current despotism and tyranny? Ironic, isn’t it? America celebrates its birth as a free constitutional republic as it relinquishes its freedoms and liberties to a government created to protect those freedoms and liberties. What does that mean?
Unfortunately, there is not a definitive answer for that question. Many in America still fiercely embrace God-given unalienable individual rights, limited government and principles contained in the Constitution. However, some of these individuals wrongly accept what some government tool, Harvard educated progressive liberal “lawyer” or nine black-robed individuals sitting on the Supreme Court declare as “constitutional” instead of finding out for themselves. With good intentions, they subvert the Constitution while vehemently declaring to protect it.
Still, others adhere to the original intent of the Constitution, bringing to light every usurpation, crime, treasonous act and tyranny perpetrated by government, which is filled with “party” tools. Yet, the opposition silences those voices through political correctness, multiculturalism, teachings in the government indoctrination centers known as schools, and brainwashing institutions of higher learning disguised as colleges and universities. In the worse cases, Americans are murdered or imprisoned for their embrace and exercise of God-given rights by the government charged to protect those rights.
There are only two types of American citizens – constitutionalists and anti-constitutionalists. One either supports the Constitution in its entirety, recognizing it is not a perfect document, but the one that best serves to protect God-given unalienable rights or one does not. When one picks and chooses out of the Constitution what to support and what to discard, one cannot be said to be a constitutionalist. While I may not agree with the presidential “power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the united States, except in cases of impeachment,” I understand why it is there, the true intent, and will defend its inclusion. Can it be abused? Yes. Has it been abused? Yes. However, men of honor, integrity and strong moral character would not engage in abuse of powers delegated to them. So, the problem is not the Constitution, but the men the people elect to “serve;” they are not leaders, but servants to the people by upholding the Constitution.
As you engage in Independence Day activities, think about where you stand. A man cannot have two masters. One cannot be loyal to “party” and embrace the Constitution since “parties” have agendas to amass power and control. One cannot profess to embrace the Constitution as one picks over it to gather what they like and discard what they don’t and reading into passages meanings that are not there. One cannot declare the Supreme Court as the definitive on constitutionality when the Constitution does not give the black robed nine that power. One cannot reject the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God while claiming to embrace the Constitution, since those laws are the highest of all. Moreover, one cannot continue to refer to elected servants as “leaders;” for, by altering their status, one assumes the position of follower or servant.
Whether you realize it or not, we the people are surrendering our independence, our freedom, liberty, and our Constitution piece by piece through legislation and Supreme Court decision, along with various government negotiated “international treaties.” No shot has had to be fired. No armies have had to line up to face off against one another. The United Kingdom voted to exit the European Union, reasserting their “right” to self-government and national sovereignty. The government of the United States prominent politicians chastise the Brits for it while celebrating centralized power and worshipping subservience.
It’s something to think about on the 240th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.
Article by Suzanne Hamner