It is difficult for me to read liberal bloggers interpretation of the Constitution without scratching my head in confusion. In some cases I just wonder if it was a misguided teacher in their junior high school who lead them astray (as was my case when I was younger), or if it is simply their feeling of superiority and the idea that they know better than those who came before them. Although it is rare to find the latter (it is not easy to speak out against the Constitution without appearing unpatriotic), it certainly happens more than I like. It is much more common to read misguided views, those impressed upon us at an early age by teachers, or even parents who did not completely understand the document themselves.

There is no Constitutional issue which is more divisive than the First Amendment. The first ten words of the Bill of Right have been the most argued, and in my opinion, most widely misconstrued in the history of the Supreme Court.

Today I was reading an article by Ed Brayton at Science Blogs which once again reminded me why I do not believe in the Constitution as a “living document” as many on the left do. First let me point out that Ed Brayton is one of the few liberal bloggers I can actually read without wanting to bang my head on the desk out of frustration. He typically presents his arguments in a logical manner using facts and history to back up his statements and rarely if ever resorts to name calling and propaganda like are found on many leftist blogs. That being said, there is no issue we could be further apart on than the first amendment.

I had written once before in a reply to an article I saw on his blog regarding what I consider a the ‘myth’ of seperation of church and state. One definition of the term myth is “A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology.”

Here is what I wrote 8 month ago regarding this issue:

The Supreme Court made an error in judgment when entering the term ’separation of church and state’ in the Everson decision. There is no need for me to point at that those words do not appear in our Constitution, everyone knows that. Most are also aware that in the Everson decision, the Supreme Court was quoting a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists. What never is mentioned however is exactly what “State” Jefferson was referring to. The letter which was used to invent a separation between church and individual states was written by Jefferson in 1802 while he was President (1801-1809). Therefore the State Jefferson was referring to was not one of the States in the Union, it was the Federal Government he was referring to.

This is evidenced by the religious discrimination which took place throughout the States, even while Jefferson served as President. In many States at that time, Jews were not allowed to vote. As a matter of fact, Jews were not allowed to vote in North Carolina until 1860!

Now why would a President who firmly believed in a ‘wall of separation’ between church and state allow religious discrimination to occur? The answer is simple, neither Jefferson, nor Congress had the authority to stop it.

The Tenth Amendment gave authority to the States to decide for themselves what was best for their people, as long as it was not in contradiction with what the Constitution said. The 1st Amendment only applied to Congress; therefore the States were not in violation of it by making these laws.

As you can see I did use the phrase ‘those words do not appear in our Constitution’ while referring to the term separation of church and state’, although I had mentioned it only as a statement of fact, not as a basis of argument. Today Mr. Brayton has chosen to reply to Rush Limbaugh making that argument by saying:

Same old stupid argument - if that exact phrase isn’t there, it doesn’t exist. “The words ’separation of powers’ is found nowhere in the Constitution. There’s no such thing.”

It was on that note that I felt inclined to reply to his article. While it is true the term ’separation of powers’ is found nowhere in the Constitution, it was implied by having three branches of Government, i.e. separate branches. Ignoring that for a moment I thought it would be fun to see what else is not in the Constitution.

• Affirmative Action: This is a government sanctioned policy which allows for race and/or gender to be a deciding factor for determining school admissions and job placements. It only applies to minorities (not Asians though), women, and coming soon to an ivy league college near you, transgenders.
• Progressive Income Tax: Although the Sixteenth Amendment does allow for an income tax to be charged without apportionment among the several States, it does not grant the Government the authority to tax one person at a higher rate than another. A progressive income tax is however one of the 10 measures of communism as laid out in the communist manifesto. (Mr. Brayton will tell you that the rich still don’t pay their fair share however.)
• Federal Reserve Bank: Thomas Jefferson once said that “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of the currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . the issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the government, to whom it properly belongs.” The Constitution does not grant authority to Congress to grant a third party, specifically a non-governmental agency, the power to coin and regulate United States currency. If you look at the 10 measures of communism though, guess what you see?
• Department of Education

Once again we find a Government program which is not mentioned in the Constitution, but is curiously mentioned in the Communist Manifesto.

I realize that I am getting of track here, and it honestly was not my intention to link current Government programs with communism when I first started typing, just happened that way. The underlying point I had set out to make can be found in the title of this article.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people. - Tenth Amendment, United States Constitution

The Tenth Amendment is simultaneously one of the most important Amendments in the Bill of Rights, while at the same time being one of the most widely ignored. This one sentence if interpreted literally (as should be the case when interpreting the Constitution), would strip most powers our Federal Government currently possesses. Most of the $2.9 trillion of our money the Government squandered away this year would have instead been given to the States for the benefit of the people.

This is the inconvenient truth of our Constitution, it was setup in such a way as to limit the power of the Federal Government, emphasizing the rights of the States and the people. The same people who argue that Government run schools have no right to hand out a bible because it is “un-constitutional”, seem to forget the Government was never authorized to run schools to begin with.

Sphere: Related Content



If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Constitution, First Amendment, Politics, Supreme Court, Tenth Amendment