Picture of the Week

Picture of the Week
Really, America?...

08 April 2007

The Reign of King Jeff - Day 1

The Reign of King Jeff – Day 1

Part 3

First, the Bill of Rights, to what will undoubtedly be the great chagrin of conservative and liberal alike, was never intended by the Founders to restrict state activity. If the legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia had decided in 1803 to establish sun-worship as the state religion, they were perfectly free to do so. If the government of New Jersey, being the shining star of competence that it is, decides to completely ban gun-ownership, well then, James Madison would tell you they were fools to do so, but he’d also tell you the 2nd Amendment should have nothing to do with it. This is why the first clause of the 14th Amendment is such an abomination; it completely reverses this principal. When those fine gents all showed up in Pennsylvania those many years ago, they weren’t there to determine how their own state governments were going to do things. They have their own constitutions for that. (At this point, I might pause, look into the camera, and say, “By the way, you have read your state’s constitution, right?”) They were there to determine how the government of the United States was going to do things, the existing Articles of Confederation having been shown to be insufficient. The result was the Constitution of the United States of America, not the Constitution of All the States of America. Fortunately for us, the protections found in the Bill of Rights originated in the thinking that was already in place in the several states, so when, for example, the 2nd Amendment was applied to the United States government, it was echoing the political thinking of the states. For example: Section 13 of the Bill of Rights adopted on June 12, 1776, for the Constitution of Virginia states: “
That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.” Also, Section 17 of Part One of the Massuachusetts constitution: “The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.” Oh, and simply to irritate those of you who think Christians shouldn’t be involved in politics, it was a Baptist preacher from Orange County, Virginia, who was a primary instrumentality in the adoption of the Bill of Rights. I learned about it; quit sitting there either doubting or believing me without checking it out for yourself.

Second, I would tell my fellow citizens to lose the idea that there is anything in the Constitution that protects anyone’s “right” to do wrong. As the old adage used to say, your right to free speech does not include the right to walk into a crowded theater and yell “Fire” when there is no fire.

Finally, I will contact the White House kitchen, and ask them to make a pastrami sandwich for me. I’ve tried one on a couple of occasions, and they were disgustingly fatty. Maybe the White House could do one up right. Oh, and a cup of Guatemala-Antigua coffee, too. Cream and sugar, please.

Soon, I will describe my second day in office. Until then, I am,

Your servant most unlikely to remain in office for long,

King Jeff

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I agree with you about the founding fathers' intent, but the reality is that we are now a centralized nation with states having no more power than provinces in other nations.

The rich and powerful have done what they could to be sure that they remain in power, and there really isn't anything we can do about it.

jeffh9020 said...

I disagree. There is a big difference between "we can't do anything about it" and "we won't do anything about it". The first one was disproved by the Founders. The second one may or may not be proved by our society. It starts with civil disobedience, and progresses to arms. Would you be willing to die for liberty?