Our Constitution

a few days ago was the anniversary of the Constitution of the United States of America
Robert Shenk of Faith and Action quoted the following thoughts of Sen. Orrin Hatch, asking the question,
What Is the Constitution?

On this day, 222 years ago, 12 state delegations approved the new Constitution of the United States and 39 of the 42 convention delegates signed it. They sent it to the states for ratification, the act that would make it the supreme law of the land. It is worth focusing on just what the Constitution actually is.

The Constitution opens by saying: “We the people . . . do ordain and establish this Constitution.” Nearly all Americans say the Constitution is very important to them and it requires that virtually all legislative, executive, and judicial officers, both state and federal, “shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution.” But what is this thing called the Constitution that the people established, that Americans say is so important, and that public officials swear to support?

The Constitution is the oldest written charter of government in use in the world today. Anyone who can read knows what the Constitution says. But words alone are just inkblots, and ordaining and establishing the Constitution was much more than simply putting some words on a page. Constitution Day would hardly be worth the name if it celebrated nothing more than a collection of words with no meaning. The Constitution we recognize today is more than an empty shell, it is more than what it says. The Constitution is what it means.

Think about judicial review, perhaps the most powerful thing that federal judges do in our system of self-government. In an appropriate case, judges must determine whether a statute is consistent with the Constitution. If they conflict, the Constitution wins. As Alexander Hamilton put it in The Federalist No.78, it is the duty of judges “to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.” But here we are back to the same question — what is “the Constitution” that judges use to conduct judicial review? What is “the Constitution” to which statutes must yield?

Charles Evans Hughes, who would later become Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, famously said about a century ago that the Constitution is “what the judges say it is.” Since judges cannot change the words of the Constitution, Hughes was really saying what today seems to be widely accepted, that the Constitution means whatever judges say it means. But if Hughes was right, then judges in effect become the Constitution and judicial review means that statutes must yield to judges.

But Hughes was wrong. The Constitution does not mean, it cannot mean, whatever judges say it means. If it does, then Hamilton’s reference to its “manifest tenor” makes no sense. A century before Hughes, Chief Justice John Marshall offered the opposite view in Marbury v. Madison, the case often credited with establishing judicial review. Marshall wrote that we have a written Constitution so that the limits on government power “may not be mistaken, or forgotten” and that the Constitution is “a rule for the government of courts, as well as of the legislature.” Judges are part of the government. If the Constitution means whatever government says it means, then government determines the limits on its own power. That would render the Constitution impotent and hardly worth the effort expended at the Constitutional Convention.

Marshall wrote that the Constitution represents “the intention of the people.” Intention is expressed through the meaning, not merely the form, of words. The Constitution cannot be the intention of the people if all the people did was choose some words without meaning. The Constitution could not continue to be the intention of the people if its meaning could be changed by anyone but the people. Quoting George Washington, the Rhode Island Constitution declares that “the constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all.” Empty words oblige no one. To be the Constitution, it must not only say what they said but it must mean what they meant.

The Constitution – its words and their meaning – was established by the people, can only be changed by the people, and is sacredly obligatory upon all of government, including judges. This is why the debate over judicial selection is really a debate over judicial power. It is a debate over whether the Constitution controls judges or judges control the Constitution, over what the Constitution really is, with nothing less than liberty itself at stake.

— Sen. Orrin G. Hatch is a former chairman of both the Senate Judiciary Committee and its Subcommittee on the Constitution.

The True Statesman

Lessons of Leadership
• A leader is indebted to the legacy of his parents.
• Providence chooses the leader who prepared to be chosen.
• Great leadership is never the product of natural gifts alone.
• The best leaders always educate themselves.
• A leader knows that adversity is the handmaiden to maturity; therefore, he will not shrink from difficulties.
• The unseen source of a leader’s courage is faith in God and His justice.
• A leader acts courageously because God governs providentially.
• Conviction is worthless unless converted into conduct.
• Humility is essential to leadership because it makes a leader a servant.
• A leader knows that criticism is inevitable, and thus will not allow himself to be poisoned by bitterness.
• All great leaders rule by the heart.
• A concern for people is the ultimate test of true leadership.
• The highest form of leadership is based on the bedrock of religious conviction.
• A leaders source of duty will move him to lay aside personal comfort for the interest of others.
• A man who cannot rule his family cannot govern his country.
• The home is the testing ground for all sound leadership.
• A leader’s vision is rooted in his knowledge of the past.
• A leader faces the future with a sober confidence.
• Leadership requires the courage to face the truth, even if painful.
• The difference between vision and fanaticism is realism.
• Every great leader fails; no great leader accepts failure as final.
• A leader is a guardian of his followers.
• Inspiring oratory is the result of courageous conviction.
• The character of a leader is revealed by the manner in which he handles success and power.
• A healthy sense of humor reflects a leader’s insight, humility, and sense of balance.
• A charlatan loves humanity; a leader loves people.
• A leader knows that hard work is a calling, not a curse, and the only sure path to greatness.
• Patriotic leadership means standing on divine principle in the face of human injustice.
• Every great leader will be a conservative who builds the future on the tried foundation of the past.
• A leader of men must be a reader of men.
• A leader’s courage is most clearly seen in how he faces death.
-Give Me Liberty by David J. Vaughan

The Stimulus Package: Without Intelligence

Darwin’s evolutionary debacles have produced the most froward of blatherskites both in education and political stimuli to save people from religious and economic woes. Having enjoyed the wisdom of Charles Krauthammer on many issues, the following quote in the New York Times of 2005 is somewhat unsettling: “The conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer wrote in Time magazine that to teach intelligent design ‘as science is to encourage supercilious caricature of America as a nation in the thrall of a religious authority.’” It is not arrogant to claim an Authority that has led nations to a high and beneficial moral mountain. A ‘supercilious caricature of America’ is, however, seen in a people enthralled, i.e. controlled, by a President and Congress in Darwinian heaven: a belief that education, politics, and even the Constitution is evolving according to man; Intelligence, truth, justice, and even mercy, put aside. Believing that only Government (once thought of as “of the people”) can solve the problems that overwhelm us today. Thus the solution, the only solution they could come up with, was to clean the pockets of the Tax Payer (once thought of as “Citizens”) with a stimulus package plus: 787 billion dollar spur (i.e. to get the economic horses to run) spelled out in 1,073 pages; plus a 410 billion dollar package containing 8,570 earmarks costing 7.7 billion dollars.

History proves that there is a different way, which includes an Authority which provides blessings, where “the Gospel is the glory of the State.” –The “following paragraphs from a work on the Institutes of International Law, by Daniel Gardner, an eminent jurist and lawyer of New York.” (The Christian Life and Character, Benjamin F. Morris). He says,
“The permanent welfare and glory of every sovereign state demand a faithful obedience to the law of nations, founded on the precepts of the gospel. Self-preservation calls for it; interest and duty require it. International and municipal law are based upon the gospel, and obedience to them is necessary to the happiness and prosperity of every state. The violation of these celestial doctrines has swept away the Assyrian, the Egyptian, the Greek, and the Roman Empires; and the ruins of Baalbe, Palmyra, and Thebes, the shattered Parthenon, and the remains of the Roman grandeur, all attest the suicidal effect on empires of disobedience to God’s law of nations. Spain, once great and powerful, has fallen by her atrocious national offences from her vast power in the reigns of Charles V. and Philip II. History teaches that national sins, by a fixed moral law, punish the states that commit them. Self-preservation, as well as the obligation of the Divine law, demands a voluntary obedience to the precepts of the gospel in all international transactions.
“The sanctions of that law cannot be disregarded, or its sure penalties avoided, as the King of kings enacted it. All nations before him are as the small dust of the balance; they are counted to him as less than nothing and vanity. He holdeth the seas in the hollow of his hands; he weigheth the mountains in scales; he sitteth on the circle of the earth; he ruleth the hosts of heaven and the inhabitants of the earth; he ruleth the hosts of heaven and the inhabitants of the earth. His title is Jehovah in the highest.
“May our republic and all nations obey that law and enjoy its promised blessings.
“The precepts of the gospel are the basis of all law. It is a moral code of general principles, which, intelligently and honestly applied, will solve every question of international right and duty. In this age of civilization and improvement, a liberal code of public law, based upon the golden rule of the gospel, and assented to by the leading nations of Europe and America, is a great desideratum.
“Our American public and private international law is composed in part of a written code, enacted in the form of a nation Constitution and State Constitutions and State laws, and in part of the law of national comity.
“This law seems to rest on the golden rule of the gospel, and as the fruits of Christian civilization, to belong of necessity to American jurisprudence, as God’s appointed regulator of the rights and duties of all national and State sovereignties. Treaties, constitutions, and laws merely recognize and regulate it in certain respects, but its true basis is in the command of Jehovah to nations and states, as well as to individuals, ‘Do unto others as you would they should do unto you.’ The observance of the principles of the gospel will insure the prosperity of every State and nation.”

Our elected leaders take an oath to be obedient to the Constitution of the United States of America that has been established upon the rock of God’s Law. The strength and hopes of America has rested upon the truth that we are a Republic where each State is sovereign and the president and congress and court are to protect and sustain this strength. The so-called ‘Stimulus’ is nothing more than the desire to control, and in so doing to put aside the intelligence and wisdom that the Almighty God alone gives, revealed to the magistrates through His Word.
Robert L. La May

President-Elect: A New Executive Office

A New Office (with a background of American Flags, a podium, and a seal) has been added to our “Republic.” Though an interim one, the Office of President-Elect challenges the “balance of powers” which our forefathers planted in the Constitution of the United States of America. This balance should not be uprooted, but should be observed, because “We the People of the United States … do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Interestingly, our Constitution’s three blossoms of the “balance of powers” begins, not with the President, but with the Legislature (Article I): “All legislature Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” These are deliberating bodies and should have ample time for discussion, etc., before passing any laws or bills on to President; i.e., “All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives” (see Section 7).
Article II addresses the President: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” Before he can execute his Office he is to take the following oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” (Section 1). Besides being “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy” (Section 2), he shall “give to the Congress information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient” (Section 3). There is no such power given to the “Office of President-Elect.”
Article III reads, “The Judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court … shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States,” etc.

Therefore a “President Elect” must curb his desire for power, which disturbs the balance of power to the detriment of the “We the People” and the use of money that is hard-made by them. There is another problem that has been with us, but is raising its head, as well as its arms and feet. That is a welfare system, by which the Government interferes with the homes and businesses of the people. It is called laissez-faire! The dictionary defines ‘laissez-faire’ as “the principle that business, industry, trade, etc. should operate with a minimum of regulation and interference by government. “Balance of Power” is redefining ‘laissez-faire” as “the principle that Government should regulate business, industry, trade, etc, with a minimum of interference.” This seems to have been the operative principle of the new office of a President-Elect, as billions of dollars are to change hands, with the justification that Government alone is the answer.

Power also comes from promises made. Take the promise, “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” This “Act” is a sweeping bill that would abolish all pro-life regulations across the nation, from parental notification laws to bans on federal funding of abortions … FOCA shows no such restraints; it nails shut the coffin on pro-life choices and safeguards” (C. Norris). Abortion is nothing more than the taking of a life that is being nourished within the womb of a woman. The horror and stupidity of such a killing is illustrated in the following story:
An editorial by James Delingpole, Human Events, “Even a Cockroach Has Rights,” tells us, “Yes, it really is now a criminal offense in Britain to abuse an ant, a worm, a slug, a cockroach, a scorpion, a stick insect or what ever creature you care to name. The moment you decide to keep it as a pet you are obliged by our Animal Welfare Act to take full account of its welfare needs – or face a $30,000 fine or a twelve-month prison sentence.”
The DEFRA’s (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; you can look up similar departments in the USA), “new guidelines has the British public fully aware of its manifest absurdities.” Whether it is a mouse or a cat, once it is taken in as a pet, the care of each must be in agreement with the guidelines. Mr. Delingpole then asks this question: “How low in the biological chain do you have to go before an animal becomes ineligible for protection? Suppose I kept a pet amoeba: could I be imprisoned for being cruel to one of those? Sadly, the law does not specify.”
However, in the USA we have the multi-million dollar Planned Parenthood and its ‘Abortion’ clinics that tell us that there is, in the biological chain, the lowest of beings, which can be killed within the womb or on the way out. The amoeba has more protection than the baby in the womb; or even the poor women who has to be put under the knife to protect the so-called freedom of choice.

It is Liberty which is at stake, whether it is for the Citizen (now called tax-payer) or the baby in the womb. We turn again to the Constitution: “But if reason is the foundation of the Founder’s vision—the method by which we justify our political order—liberty is its aim. Thus, the cardinal moral truths are these: that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—that to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed” (Cato).
Liberty speaks also to those in slavery as well as to those in the womb. These words from Abigail Adams, the wife of John Adams, speak of these liberties for all: “Is it not amazing, when the rights of humanity are defined with precious liberties, in a country above all others fond of liberty, that in such an age and in such a country we find men professing a religion the most humane and gentle, adopting a principle as repugnant to humanity s it is inconsistent with the Bible and destructive to liberty? Believe me, I honor the Quakers for their noble efforts to abolish slavery. It is a debt we owe the purity of our religion, to show that it is at variance with that law which warrants slavery.” (The Christian Life and Character).
If we cannot apply Abigail’s thoughts to the slavery of Abortion, we cannot claim liberty in the sight of our Creator and Lord. However the enemy is active, watch for their desire to keep Pro-Life advocates out of the Washington Inauguration.

Robert L. LaMay,
Asst. Editor, the Christian Observer

ATHEIST SCROOGES

“Atheist Scrooges” (with apology to Ebenezer who became a second father to Tiny Tim) have run rampant in ’08 and will do so in ’09 if not checked by those who love truth and practice righteousness. History is not a hindrance to these practitioners of lies and hopelessness. Christmas ’08 has passed and will be in ’09. The story of the birth of a Savior by the name of Joshua (whom we call Jesus) is an historical fact that cannot be erased. He was born in Bethlehem at the time of Augustus Caesar. However, facts do not hinder the Scrooges who need to deny the God of History, to carry on their Godless agendas.
The schemas of these Scrooges hate the colors of red and green and the displays of reindeers and, of course, the Manger scene. Chuck Norris recently wrote in his article “Jacking Jesus” – “This year just over the past week, dozens of mini-messiahs have been nabbed from Nativities across the country. Residences, churches and even civic displays in New York, Michigan, Nebraska, Indiana, Florida, Tennessee, Missouri, Illinois and Texas have been exploited by these Christmas scrooges.” These Scrooges seek to destroy the Christian by using the claim of “separation of Church and State” (which is not, in any way, taught in our Constitution), thus calling what they wish to destroy, “religious” (of which they themselves are, as the Humanist Manifesto clearly affirms “Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created”).
Let us also call upon those who despise the Christian faith, those ‘politically correct scrooges’ or ‘statesmen scrooges’ or ‘atheist scrooges.’ Of course, we must not sell the atheist short; they are consistently, ‘ATHEIST SCROOGES’ throughout the year. They have truly shown their colors. There are no green or red, or bright colors of any kind, just grays and blacks. In other words, there is a lack of color. The atheist has shown their true ‘no color’ (i.e. no hope) testimony. CNN reported that an atheist sign was erected alongside a Nativity scene outside the Legislative Building in Olympia, Washington; and that it was stolen and then found. Fox News reported of another scene at the same place: “The 25-foot noble spruce, officially called the ‘Capitol Holiday Kids Tree,’ is sponsored by the Association of Washington Business and tied to a charity drive for needy families. It’s been a Capitol fixture for nearly 20 years. Although nominally secular, the tree is clearly recognizable as a sign of Christmas: it’s strung with lights, topped by a large golden star and usually surrounded by faux wrapped presents.”
The placement of such a sign should be seen as an eye-opener for all people with minds able to reason. The Atheist’s sign begins with this hope: “At this season of THE WINTER SOLSTICE may reason prevail.” (Solstice meaning the shortest day of the year.) Therefore, let us reason together. What hope does the Atheist give us? Listen: “There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.” In other words, while the two displays, which they wanted their display to stand, were positive in hope of love and charity, their display is one of hatred and despair.
However, this Christmas cheerlessness has not ended with a new year, the “Atheist Scrooge” continues to spread his misery. It is brought to our attention in a local paper whose heading is, “Lawsuit would challenge inaugural oath, invocation” (Washington AP), which reads, “A California physician and attorney whose legal fight against the words, ‘under God’ in the pledge of allegiance has drawn national attention now says he will join a lawsuit seeking the removal of all references to God and religion from President-elect Barack Obama’s inauguration ceremony. Michael Newdow believes references to God or religion are unconstitutional. He wants to remove the phrase ‘so help me God’ from the oath of office and block the invocation prayer from Pastor Rick Warren. Newdow says the suit will be filed Tuesday in D.C. District Court. The plaintiffs include 17 other people and atheist and humanist organizations.”
The ‘Scrooges’ keep marching on. However, to give just an apology to the ‘Scrooge” of Charles Dickens story, A Christmas Carol, would not be enough. Mr. Dickens’ begins with a depiction of Scrooge may fit the “fool who says in his heart there is no God,” –“Oh! But he was a tight fisted hand at the grindstone. Scrooge! A squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous, old sinner.” May the truth of God pierce the hearts of these “fools” as was the heart of Scrooge, who “lived upon the Total Abstinence Principle, ever afterwards; and it was always said of him, that he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge. May that be truly said of us, and all of us! And so, as Tiny Tim observed, God bless Us, Every One!”
Robert L. LaMay,
Asst. Editor, http://www.christianobserver.org/

CHRISTIANS BE INFORMED

Christians must keep themselves informed as to the changes some statesmen desire to expedite in the months to come. Alan Sears of Alliance Defense Fund (.org) wrote on November 18, 2008:
Whatever else lies in store for the United States in the months and years ahead, statements and promises made on the campaign trail give clear indication that the new president and many congressional leaders plan sweeping changes that could soon seriously impact our First Liberty – particularly religious freedom – for all Americans and will create many legal challenges.
Among the policies that pose the greatest threat:
1. Enactment of the Freedom of Choice Act, which could remove nearly every existing restriction to abortion on demand across the country – and compel health professionals and hospital workers to assist in abortion procedures, even if doing so violated the deepest beliefs of their conscience.
2. Repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act and nationalization of such pseudo-marriage arrangements as "domestic partnerships" and "civil unions." In short order, some same-sex "marriages" could be recognized by the federal government for many things – including Social Security and tax purposes – and openly homosexual behavior could be permitted in the military.
3. Enactment of the Employee Non-Discrimination Act, which could force employers – including religious and non-profit organizations – to accept openly homosexual behavior when hiring for available positions. In other words, if an individual practicing homosexual behavior applies for a job as a counselor for a non-profit ministry to small children, the ministry cannot take that behavior into consideration when reviewing the application.
4. Enactment of the Matthew Shepard Act and other laws that would effectively empower government officials to act as "thought police," punishing anyone who – in their estimation – communicated "hate speech" or committed "hate crimes." This would almost certainly include any pastor or Bible teacher who presented a biblical view of homosexual behavior.
5. Enactment of the "Fairness Doctrine" – which could, for all practical purposes, eliminate Christian and conservative free speech on the nation's airwaves. (One congressional leader has already likened such speech to "pornography.")The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) will, of course, be prepared for a legal response to such violations of our First Freedoms and the U.S. Constitution.

The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) will, of course, be prepared for a legal response to such violations of our First Freedoms and the U.S. Constitution.

THANKSGIVING? GOVERNANCE BY WHOM?

Words flow glibly from the lips of many elected officials, from thankful hearts they cried out “God bless America,” to promises “I will first do this and that when I take office.” Who then governs America? Is it God who blesses or is it man and his promises? Has God been made a tool to be used on occasions, but man the savior? Tyranny begins when man believes that he is, not only the master of his destiny, but also the master of our destiny. He relegates the Bible and its Writer to a religion he has defined as a trash bin of foolish men, delegating himself as the deliverer; i.e. protecting the right to end a precious life in the womb. These men who wish to be the deliverer of men are scared to death of the past which seems to emerge before them, which declare the truth that there is an Almighty God who rules and providentially cares for his Creation. If not, why do they not allow children to express their belief in a Creator and Savior? Why are they afraid to sing the last stanza of our National Anthem? Which praised God:

“Oh! Thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand / Between their loved home and the war’s desolation! / Blest with victory and peace, may the heav’n rescued land / Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation. / Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just, / And this be our motto: ‘In God is our trust.’ / And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave. / O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.”

May our homes and nations remember God with much thanksgiving, the spirit that reigned in the history of our nation. This kind of gratitude finds an example in the “1783 Thanksgiving sermon preached at Philadelphia on behalf of the Continental Congress, the Presbyterian chaplain George Duffield spoke …And to him be rendered the thanks, and the praise -not to us:-not to us- but to thy name, O Lord, be the glory. For thine is the power, and the victory, and the greatness. Both success and safety come of thee. And thou reignest over all: And shall wrought all our works, in us, and for us. PRAISE THEREFORE THY GOD, O AMERICA. – PRAISE THE LORD, YE HIS HIGHLY FAVERED UNITED STATES.
“The English Puritan and the American patriot had each seen the same Lord of Israel in their deliverance, both in chapter and in verse. And, as America’s success was ‘marvelous’ in his eyes, Duffield closed his 1783 Thanksgiving oration with a call for biblically grounded governance in the newly born nation of United States: It is that we love the Lord our God, to walk in his ways, and keep his commandments, to observe his statutes and his judgments. That a sacred regard be maintained to righteousness and truth. That we do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with our God. Then shall God delight to dwell amongst us. And these United States shall long remain, a great, a glorious and happy people. Which may God, of his infinite mercy grant. Amen.” (Daniel J. Ford, In the Name of God, Amen)
We will only be a “glorious and happy people” when the Lord will bless us, and his Word and Law be returned to our homes, churches, and to the legislature and judicial governance in our United States.
Robert L. LaMay,Asst. Editor, the Christian Observer