12:10 PM -:- Posted by Allen    

The Road to Hell...

...is paved with good intentions.

Before a man can do evil, he must believe that what he is doing is correct for the circumstances he perceives.

The easiest way for someone to commit such a misinformed deed is to be in fact, misinformed.

WorldNetDaily's sister publication, Whistleblower Magazine, carries a story hyped in WND under the headline, The Constitution: America's ultimate battleground WND explores whether USA's founding document is still the law of the land

Two important quotes from this promo piece illustrate the good-intentions/bad result proposition.

First:

"THE CONSTITUTION: America's ultimate battleground" (the actual name of the article) shines a bright journalistic spotlight on a critical question: Is the U.S. Constitution, as many today contend, a "living" document whose interpretation can change and evolve over the decades, so that it means whatever legislators and judges want it to mean? Or, is it still the supreme law of the land, which must govern every aspect of government according to the original intent of its framers – a document that severely restricts government, especially at the national level, while guaranteeing the "unalienable rights" of American citizens?

Let me say right here and for all time that I believe the constitution is NOT a "living document", whatever that fantasy is. A constitution, by definition, is a legal policy statement that gives form and substance to the existence, structure and legal philosophy of a country.

As such, it is the bedrock upon which its country rests, and the firmness of its existence is essential to any hope for a predictable rule of law in that country.

The farce of our constitution being a so-called living document has been foisted upon our children by our domestic enemies in the government schools, so as to lay the groundwork for rule by opinion.

So there I am, firmly on the constitution-as-supreme-law position.

It is at this point, however, that WND begins to get lost. In asking the question whether the constitution is a document that severely restricts government, especially at the national level, while guaranteeing the "unalienable rights" of American citizens? after having decried certain US Supreme Court decisions that do exactly that, WND reveals that it, like nearly eveyone else, has its own extra-constitutional agenda that it wishes to impose through law and justify under the constitution.

Bummer! But not unusual. A vast majority of the people I know in the so-called constitutionalist movement are of the same mind.

Here is the second of the quotes I promised. It actually came first in the article.

Stunning recent Supreme Court decisions validating reverse discrimination, freeing hundreds of sex abusers and arguably opening the legal door to legalized polygamy, incest and bestiality have inflamed an already growing concern among many Americans that the U.S. Constitution is deader than a doornail.

Now, I'm not saying that I agree with all of those decisions. In particular, I believe that any type of discrimination other than necessary discernment regarding the qualifications for an employment, political or marital position is wrong. And when the government does it as affirmative action to compensate the descendants of dead victims at the expense of the innocent descendants of people who weren't even involved in the crime, that's unconstitutional. It's an illegal bill of attainder working a corruption of blood.

The item complaining about freeing sex offenders is disingenuous at best. It wants us to disregard the constitution itself when it comes to certain socially-offensive illegal acts. Call someone a sex-offender, strip him of his rights. Well, it can't work that way under our constitution, unless the constitutionalists themselves want to admit that they, too, prefer the rule of opinion to the rule of law. The simple fact is, the people who are up for liberation were imprisoned under illegal (unconstitutional) ex-post-facto laws --laws that were passed after their acts were committed and then applied retroactively. You can't do that here, no matter how large the outrage you feel.

Next, we have WND's problem with the marriage and sex rulings.

The position WND takes is just plain nuts.

Constitutions don't contain laws about specific crimes, and they don't restrict citizens, they restrict governments.

So there is no basis to the opinion that same-sex marriage, or any other type of alternative individual behavior, sexual or otherwise, is repugnant to the constitution. Yet there is every reason to understand that laws making those acts illegal are in fact repugnant to the constitution.

We have rights and freedom, or we don't. Just because some religious perspective or another believes that something is wrong, that doesn't make it a proper subject of legal prohibitions.

To outlaw something because it offends your religious sensibilities is itself unconstitutional. It violates the freedom of religion of the other guy if you try to enforce your private morality upon him.

It doesn't matter whether a majority of the citizens subscribe to a religious prohibition, they do not have the power under the constitution to enforce that religious opinion against non-subscribers.

After all, this is NOT a democracy! And amazingly, the religious offenders I'm talking about tend to consider themselves republicans.

As I said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. And to do evil, a man must think he is doing right.

Religious legislation fits both of those points.

And it's unconstitutional.

WorldNetDaily, and the vast majority of our socially-fascist republican/conservative friends, are woefully misinformed.

Just like the children of today who have been mis-educated by today's humanist-dominated school system, they were mis-educated by the church-dominated school system of the past.

As for spouting opinions, here's mine: conservatives and liberals are identical on one point: they agree that the constitution can be twisted to support their respective positions.

In that sense, they are all insane.