Posted on 05/05/2011 12:38:59 PM PDT by hope_dies_last
In a town hall on July 24, California Congressman Pete Stark gave us a revealing look into the mind of a liberal. He made the following statement regarding the Constitution, “I think that there are very few constitutional limits that would prevent the federal government from rules that could affect your private life.” While his honesty is admirable, this view is deeply unsettling to Americans who believe in the rule of law.
When liberals are asked about their interpretation of the Constitution, they generally are not as truthful as Congressman Stark. They tend to respond with ambiguous rhetoric about a “living Constitution.” The basic idea follows that the Constitution naturally adapts to changing conditions over time. This definition is their way of avoiding the fact that they do not believe in adhering to the Constitution as it is written or pursuing the correct steps for amending it.
The Liberal philosophy uses the “living Constitution” concept to legitimate any usurpation of power from the people. When liberals want to pass a piece of legislation that is not permitted under the Constitution, they spuriously use the General Welfare Clause as their justification. Using this method, they claim that healthcare, a living wage, and even owning a home are constitutional “rights.” This thoroughly distorts the original intent of the Founding Fathers.
Read more at:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2010/aug/5/liberal-interpretation-constitution-revealed/
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Conclusion: Quite clearly liberals and “progressives” fundementally speaking, hate the Constitution and have attempted to redefine it.
Whatever in the world leads liberals to believe the collective good is better than the individual’s right is plain foolish... Precisely and namely because they are God-given rights...
An example of what is meant by an individual’s God-given rights:
As Christians, we believe we are saved by confessing Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, individually, not collectively. I cannot be saved, becuase my father is a Christian and vice versa. Individuality is freewill, freewill is a God-given right; and big government, unequivocally is always inclined to ultimately remove these rights for the benefit of the state.
You may have a point, but what the Hell is it?
According to the administrative law that passes for all law anymore, an "individual" BY DEFINITION, has NO "God-given rights," because an "individual" is defined as a State-created "corporate person," rather than a "natural human person."
Individuals, therefore, have privileges.
Natural human persons have God-given rights.
How do you refute the presumption that you are a corporate individual? How do you force the government to explain the process by which one definition is swapped for the other? How do you even get the government to define, exactly, how a "corporate individual" could possibly also be a natural person going about their lawful business protected by RIGHTS?
You can't - they won't give you the standing to do so. The courts will hear from individuals, but only as they allow them to speak, and they don't allow this subject. The courts have no jurisdiction over natural human persons, so they don't acknowledge them or their questions.
It's a complete fantasy, held as reality. Literally made up out of thin air. For the purposes of the law, you aren't a human being - you're a mythical corporate creation. Why? Because corporations were ruled to be held as a person. So therefore... persons may be held as corporations! Ta Da!
This is the real battleground - and no one even understands it's importance.
And you thought schools weren't doing their jobs!
Oh lord, not the sovereign citizen crap.
That makes one feel so much better, eh?
The constitution is necessary not only to prevent tyranny but also to protect the people from the human frailties of their rulers. Libtards are statists who prefer oppressive big government, and who don’t care at all if their libtard leaders have any frailties.
“I believe liberals also have a distorted view of The Constituion.”
That would be an understatement I believe.
Keep in mind that the original purpose of our Constitution was to RESTRAIN government, not to give it license to continually expand itself.
?????? If the citizens are not sovereign in this country, who is? Read the Constitution. State Constitutions, which have been held to be “constitutional” speak directly to the flow of power from the sovereign citizens, to their Representatives. We as citizens are the boss, we tell our representatives what to do, and they should do so or they are voted out.
The problem is, we all sit here with our firm bliefs, our guns and our thousands of rounds of ammo, and the Statists and Socialists and Commies continue to run our country into ruin while we log onto FreeRepublic and wring our hands and stomp our cute little feet.
Face it; we get what we deserve for being a bunch of well-armed pansies.
;-\
Deconstructivism.
I’m speaking of the actual Sovereign Citizen movement, which originated with the neo-nazi whack job Christian Identity guys.
These are the same people who claim that a gold fringe on a US flag in a court puts you under admiralty law instead of US law, that most fed/state/local taxes are illegal, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.