No Compromise

The strongest betterment of our nation starts with the refusal to compromise the most morally corrupt ideas. Our nation began under the best of conditions, with the strongest of moral compasses, and only fell on one (morally bankrupt) count: slavery.

Yet we all know it as a tragic fall! Slavery hurt our standing, provided a justification for unfair taxation (more than once) and resulted in continual abuse from rich veins of corruption, foreign and domestic.

Morality must never be compromised. Moral evil must never be included in our compromise. The overwhelming majority of our Founders knew it. Franklin forecast, “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.

The Founders met a wall of evil when they realized it had to be all or nothing. We began our nation with slavery, with compromise, with an evil that was morally wrong. We did it to enter the new nation together, to hang together. We all hanged separately to the noose of the Civil War, the 14th Amendment, and the legalized death of the Bill of Rights under a morally bankrupt tweak. Even with a 30 year provision to end the importation of slaves, it was too little. It was compromise.

Most of our politicians are willing to compromise anything, and they giggle like children playing Monopoly with our lives. Today, like every day, our legislators are absolutely uncompromising about something, but it always turns out to be their power, not their morality. They will not compromise their power for anything, no matter how good it would be for We, the People.

It may be time to move to the next bitter understanding of what the 14th Amendment means. It was a reaction to compromise, and it was quickly compromised. The 14th Amendment, clearly intended to assure liberty to slaves, has turned Americans back into slaves. The 14th has become the means to make us slaves. It has assured that our posterity will pay for today’s financial and political debts and be responsible for accepting our sickness. It turns us over to the plantation owners . . .

One thing we can clearly understand: if we establish foundations with any diseased form of moral compromise, the infection will spread and continue oozing back out of the imperfect scar.

Please follow and like us:

Broad Strokes and Agendas

How Slavery Became Blacks, Homosexuals, Politicians, a Privacy Clause, and Big Business

“Due Process denies unjust and arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government.” That is the general dictionary opinion in this millennium. The two word clause appears in two places in the US Constitution: the 5th Amendment,

No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …

and again in the 14th Amendment,

[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …

Seems like solid and desirable stuff until you consider the broad brush interpretations the Supreme Court has mangled into these two clauses. For one thing, the Supremes consider not one, nor even just two “due process” clauses to be present here, but four. They see a procedural due process, substantive due process, a prohibitive due process, and as the vehicle for the incorporation of the Bill of Rights. And that makes eight, because they apply the same principles differently for the national and State governments. What began as the law to end slavery and support the reunion of the USA became the means to remove the Bill of Rights, deny virtually all (or at least, any) State law, and permit the feds to “order our liberties” to exclusively conform with the goals of government.

The procedural issues are mostly criminal court stuff — whether the bad guy heard his rights read to him, whether police announced themselves properly, etc. This may be the most obvious portion of legal protections, simply because it makes certain that laws are followed and obeyed. Then it gets funny.

Substantive due process deals with the nature of power, as in “who has what control over which legal action and which part of society.” The originating principle was to distinguish what laws Congress could legally pass, and what authority the President had to enact laws. Due to the 14th, the courts removed all authority from the States. This means the most frightening element of “substance” is left to the broad opinion of the Supremes themselves.

Very much along the same lines, prohibitive due process supposedly restricts vague laws. It is illegal and immoral to write a law that says, “you must be nice,” because “nice” is entirely too vague to interpret. In fact, the word that annoyed the Supremes was the word “annoy” in Coates vs Cincinnatti. They sided with a fellow determined not guilty because at some point everybody is annoying to somebody.

Incorporation begins with corruption and ends with federal usurpation, despotism, and the denial of the Bill of Rights. At the bottom line, “incorporation” is what the Supremes have done to remove all rights from States and We, the People, and give them to the federal government. Not to the protection of federal government, but incorporation hands the rights over wholesale. A few Justices have said so outright. Black, Harlan, and Frankfurter agreed that the only rights of citizens are those “fundamental to a scheme of ordered liberty.Ordered liberty was the initial standard for deciding what provisions of the Bill of Rights would be upheld by the states through the due process clause of the bastardized Fourteenth Amendment.

If the Bill of Rights are “fundamental to a scheme of ordered liberty” only, then the more “ordered” our liberty, the less of it we are allowed. This should scare the living daylights out of you and every American. We left to assume that abortion, Homosexual marriage, sexual, religious, and lifestyle favoritism, the Electoral College, voting rights, and a few specially named “privacy concerns” have special compelling interest for our “ordered liberty.” Now it gets real funny.

Ordered liberty was the minority opinion until it just was. Black, Harlan and Frankfurter, mentioned above, were the THREE solitary Justices who carried such a despotic view of rights for the first 50 or so years after the 14th Amendment. Somehow — no doubt some cause fundamental to a scheme of ordered liberty — it became the published opinion of the Supreme Court . . . except they forget to formally or officially publish it or tell us how or why.

But wait until you hear how corporations became people! Better still, free people!

Unlike us. The 14th Amendment in the hands of a corrupt Judiciary makes us all slaves to the ordered liberty of the United States federal government and hundreds of global corporations and other governments.

Isn’t that funny?

Please follow and like us: