Baptism

It is little wonder that the general government has chosen to openly deny access to openly-professed people of faith.  It has been trying, for years, to convince the American people that everything we have ever relied upon - Christianity, family, country - is bad and that the government has all of the answers.

It has sought to ruin the family by driving wedges between parents and children, and by scattering the extended family unit to the winds.

It has sought to destroy Christianity in America by denying our historic Christian roots and rejecting the primacy of God - putting unnecessary laws in place to provide protections for people who do not need any more protection than the basic laws provide when they are consistently and ethically employed.

It has sought to destroy America from within by doing everything it can to shock, dismay, annoy, irritate, and otherwise put off her allies - simultaneously getting cuddly with our enemies and making America appear to be a place nobody can trust.

Ethics, character, integrity - all things that America has stood for through the years.  Now the rest of the world is wondering what happened.  In brief, we got lazy.  We decided that our personal issues were paramount, that everyone else felt the same about their personal issues, and that the government would see to making everything work (that's why we pay taxes, isn't it?).  Even when the government's dishonesty and outright corruption was exposed like a cheating spouse, we continued to allow them to do what they were doing because we believed that they really were involved in an important market study of enhanced condoms.  As we closed the door to the room and walked away to the sound of laughter coming from behind it, we wanted to believe the lie so much that we parked ourselves in front of the TV with a beer and proceeded to perform the La-La dance.

Now, years later, we have returned to the room and peered through the doorway to see what is going on.  The pile of condoms - extortionist taxes, bad international deals, failed domestic and foreign policies - has become distressingly large, and there seems to be little difference between them all.  The crowd lined up in the room, trousers down and waiting their turn, has lengthened - Colombia, Mexico, China, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, France, Russia, Cuba, and more, all waiting for their turn.

It is time to take the business sign down and tell the rest of the world that America is not whoring herself anymore.  It is time to take a primary interest in all Americans, not just a noisy minority with no scruples as to how they get attention, or access to lots of money.  It is time for America to develop a character - a face that is consistent no matter what leadership we have at the time - so that people around the world know that they can trust America to be what she appears at all times.

If we do not do this, we are finished at a major player on the world stage.


Deus Patria Sic!

Constitutional Interpretation: Its roots

"It is essential to the being of the national government, that so erroneous a conception of the meaning of the word necessary should be exploded.

"It is certain, that neither the grammatical nor popular sense of the term requires that construction.  According to both, necessary often means no more than needful, requisite, incidental, useful, or conducive to.   It is a common mode of expression to say, that it is necessary for a government or a person to do this or that thing, when nothing more is intended or understood, than that the interests of the government or person require, or will be promoted by, the doing of this or that thing.

". . . To understand the word as the Secretary of State does, would be to depart from its obvious and popular sense, and to give it a restrictive operation, an idea never before entertained.  It would be to give it the same force as if the word absolutely or indispensably had been prefixed to it."

"Opinion as to the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States" Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 23 February 1791

This is the basis upon which purposeful Interpretation of The Constitution of the United States has been based. Something as simple as a word.

Hamilton was quite capable at putting words together, but not so capable that he could run all of them by endless generations of people without being found in error. His writings are masterful, but his reasoning fails when he steps away from simple truth and relies instead upon rationalizing and rhetoric.

The case with the word, necessary, very clearly illustrates this. In these passages, Hamilton is making his case against Jefferson's rigid reading of the text of the Constitution's Necessary and Proper Clause.

Hamilton uses a great many subjective adjectives in his supposedly reasonable and dispassionate explanation, meaning to diminish the reader's regard for the facts; "common mode", "obvious", and "popular" relegate this fulcrum expression to the office of "pebble in the shoe". Essentially, Hamilton is casting aspersions on not only the word used, but those who used the word in the first place.

His first two meanings for necessary – needful or requisite – are accurate in their summation of the definition and character of the word in question. The last three, however, are not: incidental implies happenstance without the fixed character of being indispensible; useful and conducive to merely imply convenience – not gravity.

Necessary, then, is far more than that which answers convenience or indifference. Rather, like air, necessary is that without which the condition which needs it cannot exist. Regardless of the common mode and popular usage, necessary has an absolute meaning that should not be discarded out of hand when it is not convenient.

Hamilton makes amply clear his contempt for the truth, and for those who deserve it at his hand, the most in his third paragraph. By resorting to the "obvious and popular" sense, he departs from the actual sense – regardless of how congruent they may be – and marks himself out as a politician and not a leader of men. By insisting on an enforcement of his position based on "common", "obvious and popular" perceptions – rather than dispassionate, logical truth – Hamilton reveals unmistakably his intent to sway the opinions of the masses for his own advantage.

One is tempted to believe that Washington was under some onus or duress with regards to Hamilton, explaining why it was Hamilton's unsatisfactory opinions that prevailed; to conclude that Washington was of a similar heart and mind to such a solicitor as Alexander Hamilton is the grossest insult to the memory of our first president and leader. Unfortunately, history's unfolding record of such exchanges is proving a disappointing lens through which to view our nation's heroes.