What Are Our Options When the Constitution No Longer Protects Us?

June 30, 2003 | sweetliberty

[sweetliberty]

It is heartbreaking to see what is happening to our country. We are plunging into decadence at an alarming rate and it seems that it may already be too late to turn back. Let's face it, we are fast becoming a country that our forefathers wouldn't recognize. Judges have, by and large, become activists for the socialist state. The president is dragged through the mud publicly at every opportunity by members of the opposing party, instead of being honored as our leader as he should be. Lying is as common as breathing no matter whose reputation or career might be damaged and more and more the media we once looked to for information reports only propagnada, half-truths and sometimes blatant lies. We no longer have any real security, neither as a sovreign nation with well-defined and protected borders, nor in our homes where the simple act of defending ourselves or our family can now cost us everything and even land us in prison. Our children are no longer our own to raise, but subjects of the state to be indoctrinated in the ways of "tolerance". The rights of criminals trump those of victims and of society as a whole. Marriage between a man and a woman is considered antiquated and to make a furthur mockery of a sacred institution, it is deemed desirable for the perverse practitioners of homosexuality. The evil doctrine of Islam and prayer to its false god is considered acceptable to impose upon school children, but the sacred scriptures are deemed offensive and prayer to the true God forbidden. The same people who will celebrate the slaughter of 85,000,000 innocents in the womb, will rally to spare the life of a serial murderer. We labor under an increasingly intolerable tax burden and we seem unable to do so much as get a handle on the fraud that keeps putting individuals in public office that work against the interests of the people.

When black has become white, murder is a right, lies are declared to be truth, the wrong word or even expression of belief can cost a job or even land you in jail, where do we turn? Do we continue to accept the increasing weight of the chains of political correctness and liberal tyranny? Do we keep going along with the status quo in hopes of a brighter tomorrow? Are we completely helpless to rise up and take charge of our country or are our chains already so well-forged that fighting them is futile and all we can do is moan under the weight of their burden? Is there any hope of restoring decency and common sense? Can our Republic be resurrected?

If the answer is yes, then how? It seems to matter little whether democrats or Republicans are in power, the wheels of a socialist state seem to have already been set in motion and are gaining momentum all the time. It seems that conservatives, patriots and Christians have only stayed the tide by putting a finger in the dike, but we can only hold back the flood for so long without reinforcements. Will they ever come? And if not, what then? Do we just give up, living the best we can till we die, clinging to what liberty we think we have? Or do we seek alternatives? How much do we value our liberty? Do we move away, find a deserted island somewhere? Do we secede even at the risk of another civil war? Do we challenge the government by passive resistance and noncompliance to force its collapse that we might start over? What is the answer?

I know many FReepers have given this a lot of thought and have ideas about how to cope if/when the current climate becomes unbearable. Desperate times call for desperate measures and it seems we are fast approaching desperation. The liberals would call this progress. I would call it a perilous plunge into the wells of decadence, with the glory of our past fast becoming nothing more than an echo in the ruins of a once great nation. < /rant >

"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes And clever in their own sight!..Who justify the wicked for a bribe, And take away the rights of the ones who are in the right!"- (Isaiah 5-20-23)

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." - Abraham Lincoln (first inaugural address)

[.38sw]

We have allowed the USSC to define our rights for us. The courts are politicized, and they make rulings based on societal pressures. I hadn't thought much about it until a few years ago when the USSC made a ruling that Hillary Clinton wasn't a federal official, and wasn't covered by attorney/client privelege when involved in discussion with government attorneys discussing government issues. I don't remember the specific case under discussion at the time but I do remember Al Hunt wrote a column about it called, "The Supreme Court Judges aren't Good Politicians." Or something along those lines.

I recall thinking that they aren't SUPPOSED to be politicans. They are supposed to interpet the law based on legal principals, not what is popular thought at any given time in history. This is the attitude that gives us the "living, breathing Constitution". In other words, a constitution that can be interpreted to mean whatever the he** anybody wants it to mean at a given point in history, based on convenience, political idiology, or whatever else. And we think we want this court to interpret the Second Amendment? God help us all.

Here's the quote I meant to post last night, from Jeff Snyder's essay, "The Unbearable Lightness of Rights": If the government has the power to define what your rights are, do you really have any rights?

[ricpic]

A start could be made, admittedly a small start, if Republicans who declare themselves to be conservative, including our President, addressed the nation openly and clearly in opposition to the liberal agenda.

There seems to be a constant fear that if they declare themselves to be in unapologetic opposition to group entitlements and an ever expanding government that the American people will reject them as mean and uncaring. There seems to be no confidence that they can make the common sense argument against the ever widening tyrrany.

The Germans have a proverb: When courage is lost all is lost.

Without the courage to take the first step: Stand up and declare straightforward opposition to the liberal juggernaut, all IS lost.

[sweetliberty]

"That puts us between a rock and a hard place when the laws of the land begin to make it impossible to FORCE OTHER PEOPLE TO obey God."

That is NOT what I mean at all. Don't put words in my mouth. The Bible tells us to to proclaim our faith. The laws of the land are heading in such a direction as to make it impossible without breaking the law. When a hospital whose mission statement is allegiance to God recognizes abortion as murder and is compelled to assist women in obtaining them, it becomes impossible to comply with the laws of the land AND the law of God. These are just a couple of examples.

And as far as this being over what a couple of fags do in their bedroom, it's not. The SC ruling was just the proverbial straw. Apparently you didn't read my entire post and decided to just isolate this one thing. As to my opinion on that, as I said on a thread yesterday, it is not any of my concern what anybody does in their bedroom. That is between them and God. What is my concern is is when they take it to the streets, the courts, the schools, the workplace and every other public venue they can find and force it in the face of people who are are deeply offended by it and who believe they have a right to protect their children from perverts and their deviance. It is the repercussions of this ruling I fear and I do believe that the Supreme Court overstepped its authority.

""We must obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29)

[glory]

IMO, the Southern Bapitists have been steadfast in their values, beliefs, and teachings in accordance with Jesus and biblical verse


Under a lot of scrutiny no less. We gave up on the cultural traditions we held dear and made a switch in this direction. I couldn't stay in a church any longer that preached against the 10 commandments and God's word, but hey, at least they do communion right(sarcasm). I'd rather take communion in my home and attend a church with real meat and potatoes to their message.

[sweetliberty]

" Those in the government have got to realize that they are the servants of the people"

I think they have long since forgotten that. The people only exist to make their hold on power secure... oh yeah, and to finance all their ignoble designs.

[Ahban]

She is not saying we should pass laws saying everyone has to love Jesus and go to church on Sunday, so get off that scare-mongering trash. The biggest threat to our country is not people who want to legislate morality, its those who are destroying our culture with immorality.

But why don't you tell us your result from the little thought experiment on my post #34? It will help clarify the stakes for you- if you are willing to have them clarified.

Some people would rather risk the future of the greatest country in human history rather than control their destructive, ungodly impluses. To them, all must be sacrificed on the alter of their twisted desires, but the righteous change their desires to conform with life and peace.

Here is another thread that shows how homosexuality is a threat to America...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/938512/posts

[sweetliberty]

"if Republicans who declare themselves to be conservative, including our President, addressed the nation openly and clearly in opposition to the liberal agenda."

Isn't that the truth? The democrats certainly don't have a problem doing that, and how many of ours have EVER stood up and publicly outlined what the liberal agenda is and why it is bad for America? I don't believe I have ever seen one do it. Instead they pander relentlessly to the liberal agenda in hopes that just maybe, by some twist of fate, the "compassionate" liberals may grant us a favor and allow us to slip some minor, irrelevant legislation through.

[sweetliberty]

"The biggest threat to our country is not people who want to legislate morality, its those who are destroying our culture with immorality."

Very well put.

[sandydipper]

I think resistance has already begun. Ruby Ridge comes to mind - but there are individuals battling the government daily. The size of a flag I fly or where I park my boat on my property shoud be NOBODY'S freakin business but mine.

[MississippiMan]

Do you really believe that the LAW prevents people from having sex?

You can't possibly be so obtuse as to think that's what the issue is here. The ramification of the SCOTUS decision isn't about legality. It's about the ultimate level of government endorsing and normalizing a deviant and degenerate lifestyle.

MM

[DAnconia55]

The biggest threat to our country is not people who want to legislate morality, its those who are destroying our culture with immorality.

The biggest threat to our country is 1 Billion Muslims.

You people are absolute lunatics.

[DAnconia55]

It's about the ultimate level of government endorsing and normalizing a deviant and degenerate lifestyle

Equal protection of the laws. That's all it's about.

[american spirit]

The problem with our churches are twofold in my opinion. First, far too many have allowed themselves to become IRS approved 501c-3 CORPORATIONS and in exchange for all the tax benefits associated with this status the fedgov has literally muzzled the pastors of these coporations with the threat of revoking their status should anyone start to publicly declare the truth about the wide range of self destructive problems we're facing as a nation.

Also, a recent conversation I had with a pastor of a huge congregation in the Dallas area sums up another factor contributing to our demise. I approached him with a basic question as to why his sermons weren't more strident about issues such as homosexuality, abortion, education system, patriotism, etc.....and his ansers was classic: "well, we just don't want to offend anybody, we just want to keep bringing more people into our church family". My retort was: "that's all well and good but if we're hearing week after week the plain vanilla "series of messages" that speak nothing about the real war going on outside of the church as well as the fact that we're not discussing effective means for Christian families to armor themselves in standing up to the evil permeating our society then what reason is there to keep attending this church?". With that he mumbled something and turned away to greet other parishoners.....the next week he announced another big new building project which I refused to give any $$ because he sure OFFENDED me with his attitude.

[Ahban]

We beat the biggest Muslim army in the world in three weeks. We are hunting them down like dogs the world over. Radical Islam is a backward, bloody philosophy that is on its way out, out in Afganistan, Out in Iraq, out in Iran. They are on the decline worldwide.

The Muslims may be our biggest foreign threat, but they pale in comparison to the threat of internal rot. Internal rot will weaken us to the point where the outside enemy will be a legitimate threat.

[Ahban]

I agree that due process must be upheld, but THERE WAS DUE PROCESS in this case. The judges are supposed to make sure the arrest and conviction PROCEDURES are the same for all groups, NOT decide which groups activities should be legal or illegal.

For example, if the law said that homosexuals could not testify in court, or that it was ok for vigilantes to beat them up, then that law should be thrown out. They would not be getting due process. WHAT SHOULD NOT be thrown out, is laws against specific behaviors. It is up to each state to decide what should be legal or illegal. Don't give me that hokem about legislating morality. ALL LAWS ARE LEGISLATED MORALITY- that is a primary function of law.

[sweetliberty]

Sounds like it might be time to find a new church. I know that I am in that dilemma these days. I have only attended church a few times since I've moved to Arkansas. I am an Episcoplaian and have been a member of some wonderfully spiritual, Bible teaching churches. For the past 10 years I have been seeing a decline in the church. I was thankful that ours was a longtime holdout against the pressure to ordain homosexuals. Now that has become common practice. With the installation of a homosexual bishop in (was it Boston?) a couple of weeks ago, I am thoroughly discouraged with the church. I love the liturgy and have a hard time imagining myself in a different kind of church on a regular basis, although I have enjoyed visiting many different churches, but since we have an episcopal form of government, how can any individual body be free of the corruption of its leadership? It is a vexing issue. I know that some parishes have become independent, but I have limited options where I am now.

[jmc813]

I'm assuming you've never served in the military.

[tpaine]

Common Tator:
"the Constitution is not the Supreme Law of the land. The Supreme law of this land is what ever 5 of the nine Supreme court justices say it is."



What is wrong with this picture?
182 -SL-


It has no basis in reality, just as most of Tators comments.

The USSC court are not our masters. They have no power to enforce their decisions. Congress has the power to make 'Exceptions' under Art III and the President the power to ignore them.
Checks & balances work, if there is a political will to apply them
187 -tpaine-


You are arguing the the theories upon which this nation was founded are the practice under which we live. Theory and practice separated in 1802. Welcome to the real world!
-tater-


The real world is still subject to all of us exercizing our individual rights.
Our would be political masters will have to face that fact once again, after they violate enough of them.

Wake up Tator, - you are enabling the Rinocrat system with your pessimism.

[jmc813]

I just don't get it. There's 50,000 more important things to revolt over than two men having sex.

I agree 100%.

[MississippiMan]

Exactly. Tread lightly. Wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings. It's double-sad that the church has now joined the PC movement, as you described. When I hear of pastors like that, I have to wonder who it is they're trying to glorify.

MM