Where is the Constitutional Authority?
10 September 2009
By Charles A. Hall, “Tony”
I believe I’ve become a U.S. Constitution Watchdog and an activist for the Supreme Law of the Land – the Constitution of the United States of America – to be followed and no longer ignored. In American politics I believe in two things: The People and The Constitution. Please note that order: The People and The Constitution. The first three words of the Constitution clearly state “We the People”. It wasn’t “We the Federal Government” or “We the States”. No, it was “We the People”. The People did “ordain and establish [the] Constitution of the United States of America.”
I have read the Constitution in its complete form within the last two months and I believe that is more than can be said for probably the President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, Vice President Joseph Biden, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Democrats and Republicans in the United States Congress.
I was listening to the Glenn Beck program last week and a caller called in and talked about how she and others hand addressed envelopes and provided a mailer out of their own pocket to members of the United States Congress. This mailer had a piece of paper about their mission for the mailer, a copy of the Constitution of the United States of America, and a small 3x5 card that they asked for them (Congressman and Senators) to sign that they would read the Constitution. She received only one card back. She did this back at the beginning of the year. Why is it so hard to read the Constitution and send a card back making a promise you’ll read the Constitution and live by it? Very interesting, right?
The People of the United States of America ordained and established the Constitution of the United States of America because they had been oppressed by King George and the British Empire. The Founding Fathers – George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, and many others – didn’t trust a strong Federal Government! They wanted the powers of the Congress to be limited to those outlined in Article 1, Sections 8 and 9 (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec8 and http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec9).
“Now wait, Charles, the last line of Article 1, Section 8 states: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”
Ah, yes, the “necessary and proper” clause. Okay, let us look at that. It says they can “make all Laws which are necessary and proper for carrying into the Executive the FOREGOING Powers.” [Emphasis Added] What is FOREGOING powers? They are the ones listed in Article 1, Section 8! How about the “Constitution for Dummies” version: “To make laws to carry out the powers listed above in Article 1, Section 8.” That is quite simple, right?
“Now wait, Charles, the first line of Article 1, Section 8 states: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”
Does the “general Welfare” mean a National Health Care system? NO, IT DOESN’T! Look at the beginning of the clause: “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.” It is giving Congress the power to do that awful “T” word: Tax. By laying (making tax law) and collecting taxes Congress is to: pay off National Debt, provide for defense and security (armies and navies found later on in Section 8), and general welfare.
“Now wait, Charles, again, what is ‘general Welfare’?”
I couldn’t say it any better then this: “Unlike most General Welfare clauses, however, the clause in the U.S. Constitution has been interpreted as a limitation on the power of the United States Congress to use its powers of taxing and spending” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Welfare_clause). Does that sound like National Health Care is allowed?
In 1791 Alexander Hamilton wanted to create a “National Bank,” meaning it was run by the Federal Government. “However, as early as February 1791, Hamilton had treated the subject of the general welfare in his ``Opinion on the Constitutionality of the National Bank''--written after Washington's Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, and his Attorney General Edmund Randolph, had both declared the creation of a national bank unconstitutional” (http://american_almanac.tripod.com/welfare.htm). Now if they, the Founding Fathers (namely Thomas Jefferson – Author of the Declaration of Independence and Third President of the United States), in 1791 thought the creation of a National Bank was unconstitutional though Hamilton cited the “general Welfare” clause how then would the Founding Fathers now view present-day Congress trying to create a “National Health Care System” under the same clause. I believe they would strike it down in a heartbeat.
I’m taken back to a line in the movie Batman Begins where, after twenty years since Thomas Wayne (Bruce Wayne’s father) was murdered, they (Wayne Enterprises Board of Directors) were talking about heavy weapons manufacturing. One board member said, “I don’t think Thomas Wayne would have view heavy-weapons manufacture as a suitable cornerstone for our business.”
The Chairman of the Board says, “That was twenty years ago, Fredericks. I think after twenty years we can allow ourselves to stop thinking about what Thomas Wayne would have done.”
Do you think that President Obama and members of Congress are thinking the same way? “I think after two-hundred plus years we can allow ourselves to stop thinking about what the Founding Fathers would do.” I certainly hope not!
What has the Office of President and the United States Congress done that isn’t listed as a power in the Constitution?
-Bank Bailout (under President George W. Bush)
-Auto Bailout and “Stimulus” Package (under President B. Hussein Obama)
-The House passed Cap-and-Trade
-Government takeover of General Motors
-Health Care Reform
Those are the major issues they have used their non-existent powers on!
James Madison, Founding Father, Father of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, said this in Federalist #45 (http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa45.htm):
-Powers delegated to the Federal government are few and defined
-Powers remaining in the State governments are numerous and indefinite
The powers delegated (given) to the Federal Government are “FEW AND DEFINED” [Emphasis Added] and the “REMAINING” [Emphasis Added] powers to the States are “NUMEROUS AND INDEFINITE” [Emphasis Added].
Here is the Father of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights clearly stating, “Congress! These powers are it! You have no more and no less powers then these powers right here! No More, No Less! Everything else is to the States!” How much more clearly can you get then straight from the horse’s mouth?! The Father of the Constitution should know, shouldn’t he? “If it doesn’t list it here it isn’t yours!”
The Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights clearly states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” What powers are those? The ones found in Article 1 for Congress! The ones found in Article 2 for the President! The ones found in Article 3 for the United States Supreme Court! NO MORE, NO LESS! “If it doesn’t say it’s yours then it is theirs, the People and the States!”
I don’t read anything in the Constitution of the United States that says the Federal Government, the President, or Congress can pass any legislation or sign any legislation on bank bailouts, automaker bailouts, cap-and-trade, government takeover, health care reform, or any other brilliant yet unconstitutional “idea”! They don’t have the power to do it so don’t do it!
Here is a great video to watch on Article 1, Section 8 that I found put out by a U.S. Constitution Patriot and Watchdog like myself:
Article 1, Section 8
They, the President and Congress of the United States of America, DO NOT, repeat DO NOT, have the power to do even 95% of the things they do! We need to stop ignoring them and start checking them out! Yes, vote them out! Place term limits on them! Make them follow our governing document. The Constitution was created of some really bright guys, brighter then anyone in Congress or the President is now or ever will be!
STOP MAKING UP CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY THAT DOESN’T EXIST!
Question: Where is the Constitutional Authority?
Answer: It doesn’t exist!
Respectfully,
Charles A. Hall, “Tony”
www.charlesahall.com
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Double Standard of Free Speech
I had the opportunity of having an online debate with members on another website this past week. Let me get a few things straight upfront:
First, let me be very straight forward on saying that the debate was about a NOH8 Campaign (http://www.noh8campaign.com) public service announcement and the hotly debated California’s Proposition 8.
Secondly, let me be very straight forward that I don’t know the ages of the individuals I was debating against. I asked that at the beginning of the discussion and never received a response.
Thirdly, let be very straight forward that I debated two things and two things only during this debate: 1) That marriage is not a right; it is a privilege, and 2) The Laws of Nature.
Now you’re probably interested to know where this debate took place. Well, in all honesty it took place on a Blink-182 fan website (http://www.182online.com). Right now many of you are thinking or saying out load, “Tony! Why did you waste your time on a punk rock band’s website debating Proposition 8?” I like to try to set certain things straight when it comes to Proposition 8 and the so-called “marriage right.”
You can view the full debate on the 182-Online Debate Forum at:
http://www.182online.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=3570
Here is the NOH8 PSA that sparked this whole debate and I have taken the time to provide a transcript of this ad.
NOH8 PSA – “I’m Coming Out…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7KUENa4OrQ
----------------
Woman 1: I'm coming out.
Male 1: I'm coming out.
Woman 2 and Male 2: We're coming out for equal rights.
Woman 3: Denying a minority the same rights you were born with...
Woman 4: Is hate.
Male 3: Refusing to separate church and state...
Woman 5: Is hate.
Woman 6: Spending millions to eliminate someone's right to family...
Woman 7: Is hate.
Woman 2: Prop 8 is just the beginning.
Male 4: Our fight goes deeper then marriage equality.
Woman 4: It's about human right.
Woman 3: Same rights for every America in every State.
Woman 8: Thousands all over the country are speaking out.
Male 2: But it's not enough.
Woman 4: Now more then ever it is time to get involved.
Woman 9: That's where you come in.
Woman 1: Start a dialogue.
Woman 6: Stand up for your peers.
Woman 8: Get educated.
Woman 3: Keep an open mind.
Male 5: Talk to your friends.
Male 4: Talk to your family.
Woman 7: Write your representative.
Woman 5: Be heard.
Woman 9: No matter where you are.
Woman 2: Tell them who you are.
Woman 1: Tell them what you stand for.
Several: Fight, fight for equal rights, equal rights. And together, together we can make our voices heard. No hate, no hate, no hate.
Announcer: Learn more about how you can be heard through our silent protest at www.noh8campaign.com
----------------
I would like you to note that I am not against the NOH8 Campaign's right, yes, right, to the First Amendment - The Freedom of Speech and of the Press. This isn't what I argued in this debate. I argued two things in this debate at 182-Online: 1) The so-called "marriage right", and 2) Laws of Nature.
I will not bore you with details to that debate. If you'd like you can follow the link above and read the debate for yourself.
What sparked my interest in this advertisement is several things:
1) Six times in the first part of this ad the word "right" was used.
2) Nine times it mentions about speaking out, start a dialogue, talk, write, and be heard.
Well, if there is a fight for "equal rights" why then the very ad these individuals were defending did they say this (please forgive the language):
----------------
* "FUCK THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE, ITS NOT YOUR LIFE, ITS THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO GET MARRIED. Sorry for the caps, but honestly, people who are against gay marriage...just piss me the fuck off."
* "i mean really, it's all preference. everyone has their own rights. just keep it private (that's my opinion)"
* "I advise you to educate yourself before you come on here and start a debate on such a topic."
* "None of your points have made an impact on me, and it just makes me push farther to voice my opinion for gay marriage and eradicate the intolerance against it. I don't even think you understand what it means. Your points are strongly biased, and clearly you're not supportive of their lifestyle. There's essentially no point of debating this further for me."
* "Charles A. Hole, you are wrong, you are a bigot, you are wrong, your views are totally wrong, thats it, thats all there is to it."
* "stop beating around the bush A. Hole, sorry, A. Hall, either your pro gay marriage, or your not, which is it?"
* "Holy shit batman! Charles, you are fucking retarded in every sense of the god damn word. Everyone stop replying to this non sense, he is not looking for a debate. He's just trolling."
* "My suggestion is that you keep your opinions to yourself or just to your website."
* "Jimmy he is your brother so you are instantly biased....obviously he can defend himself and his views on his own, so don't be all like "Oh you guys are all hypocrites" STFU"
* "It was discussed for four pages, so it's not like we silenced anyone." (See several comments above about wanting to silence the debate and me.)
* "The words "go fuck yourself asshole" come to mind."
* "...therefore your a dumbshit, you cant make up your own mind so you live your life by a made up story book, your an idiot."
----------------
What shocks me is that there is such a Double Standard of Free Speech in the United States of America as shown above.
Right now there are Town Halls happening all over the United States about Nationalized Health Care (AKA ObamaCare) and people are protesting the bill (HR 3200 is just one of them). Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) have called these people "un-American." The Democratic National Committee have called these people "The Right-wing Extremist Mob."
I spoke out on this NOH8 Campaign PSA and I was met with some debate, but was mainly attacked on the grounds everything I was "supposedly" saying was religious when in fact I never said anything about religion because I learned that lesson when I was a senior at Sequim High School.
There is a double standard to Freedom of Speech in America and it is ridiculous! If you have an issue you want to present you should expect that the opposite view will come about. Don't say that you are being denied a right that doesn't exist and then turn around and deny someone their actual right of free speech (i.e. "My suggestion is that you keep your opinions to yourself or just to your website.").
I want to speak out against Nationalized Health Care (AKA ObamaCare) and I am "un-America."
I want to speak out against this so-called "right" to marriage and I am displaying "hate."
Where does it end? Why is it only one sided? Why is it that if they (Pelosi and NOH8) speak out that is okay and when I speak out with an opposite view I'm "un-American" and a "hater" of Americans. Why? Why? Why?
There is a Double Standard to Free Speech in America and it is one-sided those like Pelosi and NOH8 Campaign it is okay, but those on the other side should be silenced.
I went to bed last night (Sunday, 23 August 2009) very sad, on the verge of breaking down and crying because of what I'm seeing in America (ask my wife!). A country divided when our current President Barack Hussein Obama (ON THE RECORD: I didn't vote for him.) promised to "unite" the country but has done nothing but further divide it through Cap and Trade and now through Nationalized Health Care. I am feeling depressed and sad on what I am seeing. But you know what? Since I am a Conservative and from the other side of the fence I should be denied my First Amendment RIGHT - The Right to Free Speech.
Yes, I'm sorry but when someone says "My suggestion is that you keep your opinions to yourself or just to your website" is an attack on my Freedom of Speech, whether you agree with me or not.
There is a Double Standard of Free Speech in America and it is just shocking...
First, let me be very straight forward on saying that the debate was about a NOH8 Campaign (http://www.noh8campaign.com) public service announcement and the hotly debated California’s Proposition 8.
Secondly, let me be very straight forward that I don’t know the ages of the individuals I was debating against. I asked that at the beginning of the discussion and never received a response.
Thirdly, let be very straight forward that I debated two things and two things only during this debate: 1) That marriage is not a right; it is a privilege, and 2) The Laws of Nature.
Now you’re probably interested to know where this debate took place. Well, in all honesty it took place on a Blink-182 fan website (http://www.182online.com). Right now many of you are thinking or saying out load, “Tony! Why did you waste your time on a punk rock band’s website debating Proposition 8?” I like to try to set certain things straight when it comes to Proposition 8 and the so-called “marriage right.”
You can view the full debate on the 182-Online Debate Forum at:
http://www.182online.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=3570
Here is the NOH8 PSA that sparked this whole debate and I have taken the time to provide a transcript of this ad.
NOH8 PSA – “I’m Coming Out…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7KUENa4OrQ
----------------
Woman 1: I'm coming out.
Male 1: I'm coming out.
Woman 2 and Male 2: We're coming out for equal rights.
Woman 3: Denying a minority the same rights you were born with...
Woman 4: Is hate.
Male 3: Refusing to separate church and state...
Woman 5: Is hate.
Woman 6: Spending millions to eliminate someone's right to family...
Woman 7: Is hate.
Woman 2: Prop 8 is just the beginning.
Male 4: Our fight goes deeper then marriage equality.
Woman 4: It's about human right.
Woman 3: Same rights for every America in every State.
Woman 8: Thousands all over the country are speaking out.
Male 2: But it's not enough.
Woman 4: Now more then ever it is time to get involved.
Woman 9: That's where you come in.
Woman 1: Start a dialogue.
Woman 6: Stand up for your peers.
Woman 8: Get educated.
Woman 3: Keep an open mind.
Male 5: Talk to your friends.
Male 4: Talk to your family.
Woman 7: Write your representative.
Woman 5: Be heard.
Woman 9: No matter where you are.
Woman 2: Tell them who you are.
Woman 1: Tell them what you stand for.
Several: Fight, fight for equal rights, equal rights. And together, together we can make our voices heard. No hate, no hate, no hate.
Announcer: Learn more about how you can be heard through our silent protest at www.noh8campaign.com
----------------
I would like you to note that I am not against the NOH8 Campaign's right, yes, right, to the First Amendment - The Freedom of Speech and of the Press. This isn't what I argued in this debate. I argued two things in this debate at 182-Online: 1) The so-called "marriage right", and 2) Laws of Nature.
I will not bore you with details to that debate. If you'd like you can follow the link above and read the debate for yourself.
What sparked my interest in this advertisement is several things:
1) Six times in the first part of this ad the word "right" was used.
2) Nine times it mentions about speaking out, start a dialogue, talk, write, and be heard.
Well, if there is a fight for "equal rights" why then the very ad these individuals were defending did they say this (please forgive the language):
----------------
* "FUCK THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE, ITS NOT YOUR LIFE, ITS THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO GET MARRIED. Sorry for the caps, but honestly, people who are against gay marriage...just piss me the fuck off."
* "i mean really, it's all preference. everyone has their own rights. just keep it private (that's my opinion)"
* "I advise you to educate yourself before you come on here and start a debate on such a topic."
* "None of your points have made an impact on me, and it just makes me push farther to voice my opinion for gay marriage and eradicate the intolerance against it. I don't even think you understand what it means. Your points are strongly biased, and clearly you're not supportive of their lifestyle. There's essentially no point of debating this further for me."
* "Charles A. Hole, you are wrong, you are a bigot, you are wrong, your views are totally wrong, thats it, thats all there is to it."
* "stop beating around the bush A. Hole, sorry, A. Hall, either your pro gay marriage, or your not, which is it?"
* "Holy shit batman! Charles, you are fucking retarded in every sense of the god damn word. Everyone stop replying to this non sense, he is not looking for a debate. He's just trolling."
* "My suggestion is that you keep your opinions to yourself or just to your website."
* "Jimmy he is your brother so you are instantly biased....obviously he can defend himself and his views on his own, so don't be all like "Oh you guys are all hypocrites" STFU"
* "It was discussed for four pages, so it's not like we silenced anyone." (See several comments above about wanting to silence the debate and me.)
* "The words "go fuck yourself asshole" come to mind."
* "...therefore your a dumbshit, you cant make up your own mind so you live your life by a made up story book, your an idiot."
----------------
What shocks me is that there is such a Double Standard of Free Speech in the United States of America as shown above.
Right now there are Town Halls happening all over the United States about Nationalized Health Care (AKA ObamaCare) and people are protesting the bill (HR 3200 is just one of them). Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) have called these people "un-American." The Democratic National Committee have called these people "The Right-wing Extremist Mob."
I spoke out on this NOH8 Campaign PSA and I was met with some debate, but was mainly attacked on the grounds everything I was "supposedly" saying was religious when in fact I never said anything about religion because I learned that lesson when I was a senior at Sequim High School.
There is a double standard to Freedom of Speech in America and it is ridiculous! If you have an issue you want to present you should expect that the opposite view will come about. Don't say that you are being denied a right that doesn't exist and then turn around and deny someone their actual right of free speech (i.e. "My suggestion is that you keep your opinions to yourself or just to your website.").
I want to speak out against Nationalized Health Care (AKA ObamaCare) and I am "un-America."
I want to speak out against this so-called "right" to marriage and I am displaying "hate."
Where does it end? Why is it only one sided? Why is it that if they (Pelosi and NOH8) speak out that is okay and when I speak out with an opposite view I'm "un-American" and a "hater" of Americans. Why? Why? Why?
There is a Double Standard to Free Speech in America and it is one-sided those like Pelosi and NOH8 Campaign it is okay, but those on the other side should be silenced.
I went to bed last night (Sunday, 23 August 2009) very sad, on the verge of breaking down and crying because of what I'm seeing in America (ask my wife!). A country divided when our current President Barack Hussein Obama (ON THE RECORD: I didn't vote for him.) promised to "unite" the country but has done nothing but further divide it through Cap and Trade and now through Nationalized Health Care. I am feeling depressed and sad on what I am seeing. But you know what? Since I am a Conservative and from the other side of the fence I should be denied my First Amendment RIGHT - The Right to Free Speech.
Yes, I'm sorry but when someone says "My suggestion is that you keep your opinions to yourself or just to your website" is an attack on my Freedom of Speech, whether you agree with me or not.
There is a Double Standard of Free Speech in America and it is just shocking...
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Not a Christian Nation?
Not a Christian Nation?
I had someone recommend a book to me entitled “American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation” by Jon Meacham and so far it is an interesting book. Not too long ago I was in a discussion on the Our Country Deserves Better PAC Facebook group discussion board about a statement given by President Barack Hussein Obama in Turkey:
“President Barack Obama stated at a press conference in Turkey last week that we Americans “do not consider ourselves a Christian nation, or a Muslim nation, but rather, a nation of citizens who are, uh, bound by a set of values.”” (http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/election/1003)
The discussion I had with several individuals was using the base of America’s founding documents: the Declaration of Independent and the Constitution of the United States of America.
Paragraph one of the Declaration of Independence: “…Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them...”
Paragraph two of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, 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.”
Paragraph thirty-two of the Declaration of Independence: “…appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions…”
Final paragraph of the United States Constitution: “Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth. In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names.”
“Nature’s God”, “Creator”, “Supreme Judge”, and “Year of our Lord” … They all reflect God, but which God? Do Christians, Jews, and Muslims worship different gods? I do not believe so. Were the Founding Fathers talking about just the Christianity? America was called the “great melting pot” or maybe not. But do I believe that America was established as a Christian nation in the “new world”? I believe so!
Again, the argument is that the Founding Fathers were not talking about the Christian God, just a god. I disagree. I had this thought: there are three major religions in the world today (Christianity in all its varieties, Judaism, and Islam). Now let’s go back to 1776, the year of American Independence was declared.
According to page twenty-eight of “The Churching of America, 1776-2005: winners and losers in our religious economy” by Roger Finke and Rodney Stark they list the number of congregations in America in 1776. After checking out several of the different congregations listed I found that many are off-shoots of Christianity but they only list that there were five congregations that were Jewish and no Islam congregations in America at that time.
So it is a viable defense to say that America was never a Christian nation at the time of its founding? I would say no, because there really wasn’t any other religion in America at the time of the founding other then Christianity. Yes, I would agree that we are a “melting pot” of people in the United States of America in this day and age, but I do not agree that we should abandon the principles in which the Founding Fathers established the United States of America on: a belief in God and a basis of Christianity.
I had someone recommend a book to me entitled “American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation” by Jon Meacham and so far it is an interesting book. Not too long ago I was in a discussion on the Our Country Deserves Better PAC Facebook group discussion board about a statement given by President Barack Hussein Obama in Turkey:
“President Barack Obama stated at a press conference in Turkey last week that we Americans “do not consider ourselves a Christian nation, or a Muslim nation, but rather, a nation of citizens who are, uh, bound by a set of values.”” (http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/election/1003)
The discussion I had with several individuals was using the base of America’s founding documents: the Declaration of Independent and the Constitution of the United States of America.
Paragraph one of the Declaration of Independence: “…Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them...”
Paragraph two of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, 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.”
Paragraph thirty-two of the Declaration of Independence: “…appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions…”
Final paragraph of the United States Constitution: “Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth. In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names.”
“Nature’s God”, “Creator”, “Supreme Judge”, and “Year of our Lord” … They all reflect God, but which God? Do Christians, Jews, and Muslims worship different gods? I do not believe so. Were the Founding Fathers talking about just the Christianity? America was called the “great melting pot” or maybe not. But do I believe that America was established as a Christian nation in the “new world”? I believe so!
Again, the argument is that the Founding Fathers were not talking about the Christian God, just a god. I disagree. I had this thought: there are three major religions in the world today (Christianity in all its varieties, Judaism, and Islam). Now let’s go back to 1776, the year of American Independence was declared.
According to page twenty-eight of “The Churching of America, 1776-2005: winners and losers in our religious economy” by Roger Finke and Rodney Stark they list the number of congregations in America in 1776. After checking out several of the different congregations listed I found that many are off-shoots of Christianity but they only list that there were five congregations that were Jewish and no Islam congregations in America at that time.
So it is a viable defense to say that America was never a Christian nation at the time of its founding? I would say no, because there really wasn’t any other religion in America at the time of the founding other then Christianity. Yes, I would agree that we are a “melting pot” of people in the United States of America in this day and age, but I do not agree that we should abandon the principles in which the Founding Fathers established the United States of America on: a belief in God and a basis of Christianity.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Divorce Agreement
My wife just sent this to me in a chain mail and I liked it:
DIVORCE AGREEMENT
THIS IS SO INCREDIBLY WELL PUT AND I CAN HARDLY BELIEVE IT'S BY A YOUNG PERSON, A STUDENT!!! WHATEVER HE RUNS FOR, I'LL VOTE FOR HIM.
American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists
And Obama supporters, et al:
We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course.
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is a model separation agreement:
Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military.
You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell(You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them).
We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .
You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.
We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N.. But we will no longer be paying the bill.
We'll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.
You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World.
We'll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag.
Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you Answer which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P.S. Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Sheehan, Barbara Streisand, & Jane Fonda with you.
P. S. S. And we won't have to press 1 for English.
DIVORCE AGREEMENT
THIS IS SO INCREDIBLY WELL PUT AND I CAN HARDLY BELIEVE IT'S BY A YOUNG PERSON, A STUDENT!!! WHATEVER HE RUNS FOR, I'LL VOTE FOR HIM.
American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists
And Obama supporters, et al:
We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course.
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is a model separation agreement:
Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military.
You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell(You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them).
We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .
You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.
We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N.. But we will no longer be paying the bill.
We'll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.
You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World.
We'll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag.
Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you Answer which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P.S. Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Sheehan, Barbara Streisand, & Jane Fonda with you.
P. S. S. And we won't have to press 1 for English.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Prophecy By Nikita Khrushchev Coming True!
A few weeks ago my wife and I were traveling from Utah to Washington State to see my brother come home from an LDS ("Mormon") Mission in Richmond, Virginia. I was listening to Glenn Beck on those travels and he brought back A VOICE FROM THE DUST to speak to us today!
Ezra Taft Benson (13th President of the LDS Church) served as Secretary of Agriculture (21 January 1953 - 20 January 1961) under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, President of the United States of America (January 20, 1953 – January 20, 1961).
At the request of President Eisenhower Secretary Benson met with Soviet Leader Nikita Khrushchev, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_Khrushchev). I could sum up the meeting between Secretary Benson and Secretary Khrushchev, but it is better that you hear it in Secretary Benson's own words. Here are several clips I want you to hear:
Glenn Beck play clip of Ezra Taft Benson
Ezra Taft Benson-Warning
SHOCKING 1966 BUY Devotional Warning on Socialism
Stand Up for Freedom- Ezra T. Benson
OVER 40 YEARS AGO A LEADER OF COMMUNIST RUSSIA TOLD A MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES CABINET PROPHESIED THIS DAY, OUR DAY, THAT WE WOULD LIVE UNDER SOCIALIST/COMMUNIST RULE! THIS IS HAPPENING! A FULFILLMENT OF PROPHESY!
CAN WE CONTINUE TO SLEEP?
CAN WE CONTINUE TO BELIEVE NOTHING IS WRONG?
CAN WE CONTINUE TO THINK OUR LEADERS HAVE OUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART?
CAN WE ALLOW OUR VOICE TO DIE WHEN WE HAVE BEEN WARNED BY THOSE THAT KNEW COMMUNISM FIRST HAND?
CAN WE ALLOW AMERICA, THE MOTHER OF US ALL, TO DIE AT THE HANDS OF THOSE THAT SEEK TO UNDER MIND FREEDOM AND FORCE FEED US SOCIALISM?
CAN WE ALLOW THE "SLEEPING GIANT" KNOWN AS AMERICA DIE WITHOUT A FIGHT?
SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, A LARGE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: This form of government was not the intent of the Founding Fathers! They wanted liberty and peace, a government that served The People, not the people serving The Government. They wanted the Rule of America in the hands of The People and The States, not the federal government.
If we do not Stop This Hurricane Obama and his followers Communism, OVER ONE MILLION AMERICANS WHO HAVE DIED IN ACTIVE COMBAT FROM THE TIME OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION TO THE WAR ON TERROR (94,000+ IN KOREA AND VIETNAM ALONE FIGHTING COMMUNISM!) WILL HAVE DIED FOR NOTHING BECAUSE WE HAVE FAILED OUR ANCESTORS AND OUR CHILDREN!
*Gets off his soup box*
Ezra Taft Benson (13th President of the LDS Church) served as Secretary of Agriculture (21 January 1953 - 20 January 1961) under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, President of the United States of America (January 20, 1953 – January 20, 1961).
At the request of President Eisenhower Secretary Benson met with Soviet Leader Nikita Khrushchev, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_Khrushchev). I could sum up the meeting between Secretary Benson and Secretary Khrushchev, but it is better that you hear it in Secretary Benson's own words. Here are several clips I want you to hear:
Glenn Beck play clip of Ezra Taft Benson
Ezra Taft Benson-Warning
SHOCKING 1966 BUY Devotional Warning on Socialism
Stand Up for Freedom- Ezra T. Benson
OVER 40 YEARS AGO A LEADER OF COMMUNIST RUSSIA TOLD A MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES CABINET PROPHESIED THIS DAY, OUR DAY, THAT WE WOULD LIVE UNDER SOCIALIST/COMMUNIST RULE! THIS IS HAPPENING! A FULFILLMENT OF PROPHESY!
CAN WE CONTINUE TO SLEEP?
CAN WE CONTINUE TO BELIEVE NOTHING IS WRONG?
CAN WE CONTINUE TO THINK OUR LEADERS HAVE OUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART?
CAN WE ALLOW OUR VOICE TO DIE WHEN WE HAVE BEEN WARNED BY THOSE THAT KNEW COMMUNISM FIRST HAND?
CAN WE ALLOW AMERICA, THE MOTHER OF US ALL, TO DIE AT THE HANDS OF THOSE THAT SEEK TO UNDER MIND FREEDOM AND FORCE FEED US SOCIALISM?
CAN WE ALLOW THE "SLEEPING GIANT" KNOWN AS AMERICA DIE WITHOUT A FIGHT?
SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, A LARGE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: This form of government was not the intent of the Founding Fathers! They wanted liberty and peace, a government that served The People, not the people serving The Government. They wanted the Rule of America in the hands of The People and The States, not the federal government.
If we do not Stop This Hurricane Obama and his followers Communism, OVER ONE MILLION AMERICANS WHO HAVE DIED IN ACTIVE COMBAT FROM THE TIME OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION TO THE WAR ON TERROR (94,000+ IN KOREA AND VIETNAM ALONE FIGHTING COMMUNISM!) WILL HAVE DIED FOR NOTHING BECAUSE WE HAVE FAILED OUR ANCESTORS AND OUR CHILDREN!
*Gets off his soup box*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)