Posted on 05/30/2019 6:41:28 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
That suggestion sounds similar to certain parties who advocate updating some amendments to reflect current technology, capabilities and use. For example, the left advances the argument that the 2A covers muskets, but not machine guns, or that regulated means the current term of (government) control, not training or organization.
We should assume that the founders, highly educated and completely engaged in contemporary events, knew the language they were using was general in the sense that it addressed human governance issues and challenges common to every culture, every region and every era.
So, rather than attempt to parse and tease out each word in an nuanced effort to decipher and interpret intent, I suggest we step back and address what the key take away points are from the simple constitutional provision.
To me it's clear they aren't differentiating between foreign & domestic - why would they, what sense would that make? Second, why does a formal state of war exist? How does that address a mutiny among the armed forces in a military coup? Or, does that get a pass? Last, why a formally recognized state? Again, it entirely misses the formation of a secret cabal organized among our own ranks to effect change by force.
Those who promote less radical legal solutions appear to continue to make these distinctions, when it's logical clear - at least to me - that the founders would have immediately recognized the holes in those provisions. I cannot believe they would be so blind, so it's obvious (again, to me) that they meant insurrection in the sense that it would lead to overturning the legally constructed government as provided by the constitution.
“so it’s obvious (again, to me) that they meant insurrection in the sense that it would lead to overturning the legally constructed government as provided by the constitution.”
*************
Obvious to you perhaps, but not to many judges who will interpret it in ways that don’t always make sense.
I agree that the Constitution and even our laws cannot cover every conceivable possibility which is why there is “general language” meant to guide legal decisions based on a variety of circumstances.
I don’t think that we need any sweeping re-writes but we are past the days of cannons, declared wars, and other such vestiges of the past. Technology is enabling entirely new forms of aggression, subterfuge, deceit and even sabotage in the complete absence of overt hostilities.
Therefore, we will eventually have to deal with the Constitutional and legal implications of the insidious new world we live in, in my opinion.
Even as a Soldier, and though I and many others have “[sworn] to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; and I (we) will bear true faith and allegiance to the same... So help me God” no one I know truly desires conflict or war. And most of the seasoned Soldiers and Marines I work with hope and long for their children to grow up free, and to be able to enjoy life.
At the same time, while unfortunate not all service members fully grasp this, many do realize our freedom and way of life really are not free.
And we also have domestic enemies.
Even those who do not necessarily identify as “Christian”, or who are only nominally “Christian”, have had significant questions as to the apparent war against the Constitution we are sworn to protect, with some even identifying and correlating the demanded acceptance of spiraling immorality, with the greatly weakening loyalty to our Constitution and what our nation has stood for.
It has been the topic of recent conversation and debate.
While there are many strong and related speeches and statements from the founders of our country, George Washington’s Farewell Address “hits the nail on the head”.
“... Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness - these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, “where is the security of property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?” And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.” Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle...”
It has been said, the war against all moral boundaries, and against all who would espouse them, as well as the war against our U.S. Constitution is blatant, inextricably linked, and predictable. It has never been an argument of if, but rather a matter of when, we will have to take a stand against evil and tyranny, as evil is not neutral, does not plateau, and proactively seeks the perversion, subjugation, and destruction of the hearts and lives of all, not least of which innocent children.
As everyone on this forum could attest in historical detail, many generations of Americans and their families have experienced the pain of giving the ultimate sacrifice, as they have had to stand up for their faith, liberty, our Constitution, and our way of life.
As well, one of the biggest contributors to our nations birth, were the hundreds of years of persecution experienced by people of faith, since the time of the early church. Nero lit the streets of Rome with the spiked and tarred bodies of Christian men, women, and children. John the Baptist was beheaded, Christ crucified, all but one of the authors of the New Testament were tortured to death. In light of what it meant to be a Christian in Rome, and religious liberty, the birth of the United States could be said to represent the swinging of the pendulum to the furthest opposite position.
However, as stated, there is no neutral, or rest, as long as the war for the hearts of men rages. And if and when evil triumphs, not only will there be no rest and peace, there will only be subjugation to tyranny and death.
From the increasingly hated Christian world view, at the end of the day, Satan is a “roaring lion” and seeks to persuade as many as possible, to rebel against God, in order to destroy them. Christ communicated that the world would treat us the way it treated him (John 15:20). Christians have been persecuted for their faith throughout time. It is not a complex, it is war (Ephesians 6).
Regardless of country, culture, and language, mans heart is the first battleground between good and evil. It is also from mans heart, that evil (or good) eventually emanates and manifests from.
As well, regardless of culture or language, vocabulary and narratives have throughout history, often been a reflection of the beliefs and goals of those groups or individuals seeking ascension to, or defense of the power they believe they hold over individuals and society.
This war is not new, and has been going on almost since the beginning.
In the 8th Century BC, Isaiah warned:
“Woe unto them who call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight: Woe unto them that are determined to be drunk (or to drink), and men of strength to mingle strong drink: Which justify the wicked for money and take away the rights of those who are right” (Isaiah 5:20-23)
While the context is later in time, another example of the terminal moral inversion which can and will take place in a morally compromised individual and society is found in Romans 1:24-27
“Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies, between themselves: Who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. For this cause God gave them up to vile affections: for even their women did exchange the natural us into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with hte men working that which is unnatural, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error...”
As well, from the Christian world view, numerous texts explicitly warn us of the mass/breakout acceptance of immorality in the “last days”.
Some may say it is ironic, but as the cycle (or sequence) of fear and compromise with immorality intensifies and becomes universally demanded across our society, this DEMANDED compromise (demanded acceptance) with immorality, simultaneously gives further license and cover to even greater perversion. It simultaneously WIDENS the gulf between those who would compromise and those who wold not.
Because evil becomes good and good evil, those who would fight for what is right and just, and individual responsibility naturally become the enemy.
Those who would compromise with this ever spiraling immorality, help to accelerate the spiral away from the moral principles of liberty and individual responsibility which allowed the atmosphere which gave birth to America, our Constitution, and the liberty rooted in our Constitution. It is those who compromise, accept, and embrace evil and immorality, who are fueling and strengthening those groups, and elected officials seeking who seek to end Christianity, morality, and the U.S. Constitution I have sworn to protect.
Once understood, that gets awkward real fast.
One of the gauges of a dying amoral society, is its inability to even recognize right and wrong, and the enemy which seeks its destruction.
So it naturally and rapidly becomes very unpopular to stand for what is right. This gets awkward real fast as well.
It has been stated “The comfortable experience of Christians in the West has actually been an anomaly in this regard. Because of the Christian heritage of Western civilization, combined with democratic freedoms and historic rule of law, Western Christians have largely been left alone for their faith...” However, today, this is changing rapidly. Just as in NAZI Germany, children and young adults can only laugh at the mockery of Christianity in our schools and entertainments, and are now becoming desensitized and indifferent to Christian persecution in nearly all its forms, around the world, and are increasingly blaming Christians for our societal ills, or standing against immorality.
So yes, if we as liberty loving, U.S. Constitution loving, Americans and Christians, do not go along with those who seek to end those who would stand for morality, our liberty, and our Constitution, and we take a stand, we are going to experience a lot of friction.
If we stand down, and compromise, and go along, and let the enemy determine new meanings of words, determine narratives and indoctrination, as we already have, our children and grandchildren will not only become subjugated to the ever shifting immorality of man and tyranny, (as many already have), the hearts of our children will be the playground of evil, and we will have given to the enemy the hearts of our children, and this will result in them being judged by God.
At this moment in American History, this is still largely an ideological war. But this is where all conflicts start.
Trying to hide from this ideological war will only hasten real bloodshed and real war.
As well, we cannot hide from this. Throughout time, evil and tyranny have always sought the control of all individuals comprising society. Those who represent evil and immorality will seek us out. As they are now doing, they have and will increasingly segregate us out as targets.
Not questioning your knowledge of these things at all, but as with many other conservative, loyal American, Constitution loving, anti-racist sites, FR has already been soft-targeted several times. The outcome is already unknown for any loyal, conservative American, Constitution loving, anti-racist site.
Admittedly not all would agree with this, but if our nation doesn’t turn back to God, it is only when not if, those with no moral boundaries whatsoever try to have their way.
While I am clearly not a lawyer, and as well, I am sure you are well aware of our federal law/statutes/and amendments regarding Treason from Article III, Section 3, I will only recap.
First of all, a concise definition of treason - is the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
*18 U.S. Code Chapter 115 - Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
(18 U.S. Code Chapter 115 (June 25, 1948, Ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103-322, title XXXIII,§ & #8239: 330016 (2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148
The term “Misprision of treason” defined.
*18 U.S. Code Chapter 115 Amended - §2382. Misprision of treason - Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch.645 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103-322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
As you were in part arguing, there is no question in this day and age, the entire topic of Treason is “radioactive”.
However, it is because of the shift toward immorality (lack of character and honesty), and the left-wing indoctrinated ideologies held by so many, this is so dangerous.
Today, not so much as a matter of law, but as a matter of practice, any left-wing American citizen can attack and undermine our Constitution and country from within, or from foreign soil with near impunity.
Bill Clinton is one example.
Good is becoming evil, and evil good. These days, I wouldn’t put it past a completely perverted and blatant attack on our Constitution, for a left-wing judge to rule that a conservative, who is loyal to the Constitution, would be guilty of “treason”, just to further beat down those who would stand for our country. The word “treason” has been thrown all around the Democrat Party, as against President Trump, all the while they are the ones who are ripping the Constitution to shreds.
So I totally agree, as with a Constitutional Convention being opened up in our modern day, with so many seeking to destroy our nation and Constitution from within, this is a dangerous “hot potato”.
On the flip side, we have become so weak, we have not been able to defend ourselves against subversive treasonous efforts for decades. The enemy is allowed to run rampant and do whatever they will. It is in part because of this, those who would destroy our Constitution, have become so strong.
As you are aware, aside from needing two witnesses, or confession in open court to Treason, “levying war against them” (the United States) was not the only prerequisite for treason.
It is also stated, “or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere”
In reference to “Misprision of Treason” (knowing and not reporting treason)
“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason”
In the last century Max Haupt (charged in 1943, convicted by jury in 1944) was charged and executed for “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”
Tomoya Kawakita, was convicted and sentenced to death for treason in 1952, for taking part in torturing American POW’s held by the Japanese. The SCOTUS ruled “going beyond any conceivable duty of an interpreter”. In 1953, Eisenhower commuted his sentence to life.
So yes, treason is “radioactive”, but there are many examples of Americans who have willingly “given aid and comfort” to an enemy, even while it killed American Soldiers and assets. This is by definition Treason.
Will it be exercised against guilty Americans? Not likely.
Could it be flipped and used against loyal Americans in the future? Maybe not from an American legal context, but from a global governing body? Some would disagree, but I would say likely.
I also share your opinion “... that Declarations of War are a reasonable standard to define who or what is an “enemy of the United States”.
However, it is also true, 18 U.S. Code § 2381, is still defined law. Dangerous, rarely practiced, but law. And its definition is not my “opinion”.
In practice, (by definition), while many are guilty and the very embodiment of treason defined, it has not, and will not be exercised.
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.