Protecting Our Freedoms, Including the RKBA

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by Marlin, Aug 28, 2003.

  1. Marlin

    Marlin *TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor*

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    13,855
    Location:
    At SouthernMoss' side forever!
    This article from Today's New Max refers to Justice Moore's fight for the Ten Commandments but has an equal applicability, as stated therein, to all of our freedoms guarenteed under the Constitution that are being eroded away rapidly by the "global" and anti-Forefather groups.

    Please read it seriously and vow to do what you can to contribute to bringing our great country back to the basics for which so much bloodshed has taken place.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Reprinted from NewsMax.com

    Congress: Pick Up The Gauntlet Now

    Phil Brennan
    Wednesday August 27, 2003

    "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that β€˜an unjust law is no law at all.’" – Martin Luther King, Jr. in his letter from the Birmingham Jail.

    The gauntlet has been thrown down. Americans are being challenged to demand that every word in the Constitution of the United States - the supreme law of the land - be obeyed, as it is written, not as the enemies of God and religion interpret it.

    For far too long we have allowed that document to be deliberately misinterpreted, distorted or simply ignored, and thanks to Alabama Judge Roy Moore the issue is now front and center - the time to deal with the issue is now, while the iron is hot.

    And that issue is not whether the monument containing the Ten Commandments should or should not be removed, or the orders of federal judge Myron Thompson that it must be removed from the Alabama Court House in Montgomery be obeyed. It goes far deeper than that.

    This federal judge's order is based on ... nothing. It has no Constitutional standing whatsoever. There isn't a word in that document that authorizes him to issue such an order. He is in clear violation of the Constitution, which forbids the federal government from doing anything that restricts the legitimate free exercise of religion by Americans or the rights of the states to decide what religious observances they will allow. Period.

    Yet in their manifest duplicity, the federal courts, from the Supreme Court of the United States to the lowest level of federal courts, have been engaged in a 40-year-long war against the free exercise of religion, ruling in case after case that such and such a religious activity, from such innocuous practices as school prayer to the very rights of the American people to bring God into the public square, must be banned.

    Get this straight: the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to The Constitution of the United States simply states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

    That's all. Doesn't say a damned thing about forbidding the free practice of one's religion, either publicly or privately.

    Unless you have a problem understanding plain English, this provision forbids the federal government, including the federal courts, from establishing a national church, writes David Limbaugh. It also prohibits Congress from interfering with the right of individual states to establish their own churches if they choose, which nowadays is about as likely as the ACLU opening their meetings with a prayer.

    Moreover, in totally unequivocal language, it forbids the federal government from preventing any American from the free exercise of his freedom of religion. In other words, keep your long nose out of our religious practices, Uncle Sam.

    In the face of this we are constantly bombarded with references to the non-existent doctrine of separation of church and state, which is not so much as mentioned in the Constitution.

    We are constantly reminded that there is some invisible wall of separation between church and state - a wall that existed only in the mind and letters of Thomas Jefferson, who was all over the lot on the subject of religion.

    Need we be reminded that neither the mind or correspondence of Thomas Jefferson have any standing in the Constitution and which, by the way, forbids the federal government from erecting any such wall.

    Now legal scholars are also all over the lot, finding all sorts of reasons why the Constitution doesn't really mean what it says. They say, for instance, that the 14th Amendment modifies the establishment clause, giving Uncle Sam the right to ignore the real meaning of the Establishment Clause.

    Writes Limbaugh, a longtime lawyer, by the way, "I also believe that the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment was never intended to incorporate the Establishment Clause as a prohibition against state governments. Incorporation is a regrettable legal fiction. I further believe that the other religion clause of the First Amendment, [that Congress must not interfere with the free exercise of religion] the Free Exercise Clause, has been consistently eroded and often ignored by judicial misinterpretations. I also believe that nothing in the Constitution, or any of its Amendments, gives the courts the power of judicial review. But since 1803, the United States Supreme Court has been exercising that right – having established itself, by its own bootstraps, as the final arbiter of what the Constitution means. In 1824, the Court further declared that state courts are bound to honor Supreme Court decisions."

    Clearly, the federal judiciary is out of control, trampling all over our rights as guaranteed by the Constitution - the only guarantee of those rights -without it, we cease to be free people ruled by law and become subjects of an almighty (and Godless) government.

    As I wrote above, the gauntlet has been thrown down by Judge Moore. Congress must be made to pick it up. Alan Keyes explains what must be done.

    "The text of the Constitution easily allows us to see and understand the federal judiciary's abuse of power and its usurpation of the right of the people in religious matters. It also provides a remedy for this abuse. The Congress must pass legislation that, in order to assure proper respect for the first clause of the First Amendment, excepts from the appellate jurisdiction of the federal courts those matters which, by the conjoint effect of the First and 10th Amendments, the Constitution reserves to the states respectively and to the people." Says Focus on the Family's president Don Hodel, who served as President Reagan's cabinet secretary: "What's at stake here is not just a monument in the building in Alabama," Hodel told Dr. James Dobson during his radio program Monday.

    "What's occurring here is a continuing effort to remove any reference to God or our faith from the public square. If it succeeds here there's no place to stop this rampant secularization of the state."

    "If the American people, Christians and others, don't stand up now, they won't be able to protect these freedoms in the future. It will be too late."


    It's up to us.

    Faugh 'a ballagh!


    Phil Brennan is a veteran journalist who writes for NewsMax.com. He is editor & publisher of Wednesday on the Web (http://www.pvbr.com) and was Washington columnist for National Review magazine in the 1960s. He also served as a staff aide for the House Republican Policy Committee and helped handle the Washington public relations operation for the Alaska Statehood Committee which won statehood for Alaska. He is also a trustee of the Lincoln Heritage Institute and a member of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers. He can be reached at phil@newsmax.com.
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2003
  2. armedandsafe

    armedandsafe Guest

    I agree, Marlin. When the first prohibition against school prayer was announced, it was to prevent the FORCED inclusion of ALL students in recitation of the (Christian) prayer by the school authorities. With that, I agreed.

    When that gets spun out of control to the total abolition of all displays of faith on public grounds, I disagree. As so many decisions are whacked out of line with the Constitution, we must get on the defensive and do so strongly.

    More on this later,,,,my kids are on line.

    Pops
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum best 7 minutes on protecting the 2nd Mar 14, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum HELLER, THE SECOND AMENDMENT, AND RECONSTRUCTION: PROTECTING ALL FREEDMEN OR ONLY MIL Dec 25, 2012
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Protecting Gun rights Aug 13, 2012
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum HR 17 protecting the right to keep and bear arms Feb 5, 2009
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum More freedoms to be encroached upon.... May 4, 2011

Share This Page