Posted on 07/03/2022 7:36:27 PM PDT by DeweyCA
Liberals, because they won’t accept the idea that God saved us, they must present their works as a substitute. So, they believe if they can create a saved world, they can present themselves before God for what they have done.
I’m coming around to the idea that when Christ said, “I never knew you.” to those who claim to have fed the poor and hungry, they may not have been lying. It’s just that operated under a spirit of self-salvation.
The constitution has a way to amend it, they just don’t like it....too difficult
Clashes of visions alway end up being solved in the same way. Read and heed my tagline.
"The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please." —Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1819.
"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure." —Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823.
"3. The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition." —United States v. Sprague, 1931.
Insights welcome.
Also, Trump's red tsunami of patriot supporters are reminded that they must vote twice this election year. Your first vote is to primary career RINO incumbents. Your second vote is to replace outgoing Democrats and RINOs with Trump-endorsed patriot candidates.
Again, insights welcome.
It seems to me to be a clash between honest understanding and interpretation of what the Constitution actually says, and a squirrel-y dishonest one in which it says what some would prefer it said.
SUMMARY: The rule of law vs the rule of men
There Are Two Fundamentally Irreconcilable Constitutional Visions
/\
1 Plain Meaning Truth
2 Commie Dog Faced living breathing leg humping lie.
I would tighten that up to- the unconstrained vision of arbitrary power v the vision of zero arbitrary power.
Summary: These United States have become like a married couple who have discovered that they have irreconcilable differences.
It isn’t that they don’t know about the amendment process or don’t like it. It really comes down to them not having the votes. The founders made sure amendments couldn’t be done by a simple majority, assuming they can even muster that without fraud.
You forget religious liberals. They have accepted the idea of divine salvation, but they want to force the world to their idea of a godly world at the expense of all other ideas.
This has become far more than irreconcilable differences, this IS the utter destruction of our country!! These people are insane the transgender crap being pushed on kids in school is way over the top!!
They are a fulfillment of II TIM 3:5.
They want the good things of God, but not the morality.
I haven’t forgotten them at all.
Except your original post doesn’t take them into account. They do not present their works as a substitute for God, but as work *endorsed* by Him. They’re actually more dangerous than the average liberal type.
the Constitution is an impediment to their socialist paradise
I disagree.
If you don’t rely upon God, them you rely upon your efforts.
They did feed the poor, through socialism.
However, Christ will tell them that He never knew them and banish them to the hellfire.
The second one is not a “Constitutional” vision at all.
Split it up. That won’t stop war from coming, but it will slow it down some. Time to split it up. It’s all falling apart anyway.
“too difficult”
And as important, too unpopular. Where there is broad consensus, the Constitution has been amended several times. When there isn’t a broad consensus, but the Ruling Class thinks their morality or their cause de jour should be imposed on everyone else without having to submit them to the legislative process, then the courts are supposed to amend the Constitution for them. That goes from Dred Scot to Roe to Chevron.
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.