Yesterday the Supreme Court of the United States handed down
a ruling which basically said that the government has unlimited powers in the
area of taxation and that Obamacare, as it has come to be called, doesn’t
violate the constitution. The judges who
sit on the highest court of the land are supposed to be the most educated and
well versed legal minds dedicated to sorting out the fine points of legislation
to determine the constitutionality merits of each. Let me say this now and get it out of the
way, “What a Crock!”
The black robed members of the court are too smart for their
own good; looking into the complexities of each piece of legislation while
ignoring the most basic aspects of them.
All anyone need do is look at the Preamble of the Constitution and use
it as a litmus test of any bill before them to determine whether or not they
need to look further. America was
designed to work under the premise that government is responsible to the people
who created it, that its laws would reflect the driving forces which compelled
our declaring independence and yet this most important aspect of self
governance has been ignored so often as to make responsible citizens more
concerned about the welfare of individual liberty with each passing day.
“We the People of the United
States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure
domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defenc(s)e, promote the general
Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do
ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
There it is; a simple and concise purpose for anything which
involves the governments relationship with “We The People” and all that
follows, the nuts and bolts or as
recorded, “separation of
powers”, need only satisfy this grand intent.
“The Preamble to the United States
Constitution is a brief introductory statement of the Constitution’s
fundamental purposes and guiding principles. It states in general terms, and
courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Father’s
intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the
Constitution would achieve.”
Now before you get yourself all worked up, I’m well aware
that the Preamble of the Constitution has never been used to determine the
legitimacy of any piece of legislation; at least not according to what has been
historically done.
“The Preamble serves solely as an
introduction, and does not assign powers to the federal government, nor does it
provide specific limitations on government action. Due to the Preamble’s
limited nature, no court has ever used it as a decisive factor in case adjudication,
except as regards frivolous litigation.” (emphasis added)
“Ay, there’s the rub”, as Shakespeare might have put
it. Hamlet was at that moment
considering death as a way out, contemplating perfection as found only on the
other side of mortality’s veil. If only
life were closer to that which our Creator had intended, “Ay, there’s the rub”.
The Blessings of Liberty (Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness)
are, after all, a Dream; but a dream worth striving for as we seek to achieve
what no other people have had the opportunity to achieve due to imperfect
and/or corrupted governments. Those who
took up the challenge to establish the foundations of America were men looking for a more perfect
union than what they had experienced in Europe. Isn’t that our Great Experiment in self
governance and the purpose of our founding documents, “to insure domestic
Tranquility”?
Then what in the hell have these robed wonders been doing
with our government? They sure as hell
haven’t been insuring domestic Tranquility!
They haven’t thought about the consequences of legislation which attacks
an individual’s life, liberty or pursuit of happiness; no, not by a long
shot. These black robed pontificators
are too busy checking on the fine print and have missed reading the HEADLINES.
The Preamble of the Constitution is the headline announcing
the very purpose of government and how to accomplish the preservation of
individual liberty as was intended from the beginning. Those who founded this nation paid for their
Dream in blood which cries out from the grave, “What have you done with that
which has been given you?” Thomas Jefferson had a pretty good idea when he wrote:
“Can the liberties of a nation be
thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the
minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are
not to be violated but with his wrath?” (Works 8:404; P.P.N.S., p.141)
This glimpse at the Proper Role of Government, as related to us by
Ezra Taft Benson used terms which a person of average intelligence could
understand.
“Starting at the foundation of the
pyramid, let us first consider the origin of those freedoms we have come to
know are human rights. There are only two possible sources. Rights are either
God-given as part of the Divine Plan, or they are granted by government as part
of the political plan. Reason, necessity, tradition and religious convictions
all lead me to accept the divine origin of these rights. If we accept the
premise that human rights are granted by government, then we must be willing to
accept the corollary that they can be denied by government. I, for one, shall
never accept that premise. As the French political economist, Frederick
Bastiat, phrased it so succinctly, "Life, liberty, and property do not
exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life,
liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the
first place." (The Law, p.6)”
{…}
“Since God created man with certain
unalienable rights, and man, in turn, created government to help secure and
safeguard those rights, it follows that man is superior to the creature which
he created. Man is superior to government and should remain master over it, not
the other way around. Even the non-believer can appreciate the logic of this
relationship.”
I’ll include one last foundational thought from Bastiat
before explaining how the Supreme Court has been deaf, dumb and blind to their
assigned task of preserving domestic tranquility.
“Each of us has a natural right –
from God – to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the
three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is
completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our
faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but and
extension of our faculties?” (The Law, p.6)
Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled that our
government had unlimited powers to tax, that Obamacare is nothing more than a
necessary revenue tool to provide for the common needs of a nation’s stated
goal of providing health care. In so
doing they ignored the most basic of rights, property rights. Government has never had unlimited powers to
confiscate an individual’s property and must justify at each step of the way a
reasoned and lawful use for any money required of its citizens.
Social Justice, isn’t that the term used today for latching
onto one individual’s property or efforts to obtain property and then
redistributing that property to someone who has not earned it?
Property confiscation, by and individual or
through the use of government by force or threat of force violates God’s
commandment concerning theft as well as coveting that which your neighbor has
and yet our nation was built upon these eternal principles. Our government’s Executive, Legislative and
Judicial branches have abandoned their charge to protect each individual
citizen’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to such a degree
as to make our current government nearly unrecognizable from that which our
Founding Fathers established for domestic tranquility.
“The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision
against Kelo (Kelo v New London) and her neighbors sparked a
nation-wide backlash against eminent domain abuse, leading eight state supreme
courts and 43 state legislatures to strengthen protections for property rights.”
The Kelo ruling may have destroyed the reality of property
ownership as our Founding Fathers had intended irrepealably as the Supreme
Court found in favor of the “collective” over an individual’s rights. Now include all other forms of confiscatory
government action through regulatory mandates or taxes which enable entitlement
programs, to include Obamacare, and the picture of a nation founded on sound
principles of private property becomes nothing more than fragmented memories.
This my friend is an acknowledgement that we no longer live
in a constitutional republic; rather, we are in transformative times paving the
way to pure socialism; individual rights are only brought up when it’s
convenient for the purposes of expanding the powers of government. We now are being encouraged to move “Forward”
to complete the transformation.
And so it is with Obamacare, the Supreme Court has ruled
that government has an unlimited power to tax its citizens, as if they were
subjects rather than citizens, to do with as the government pleased. We now live in a collective socialistic
society where government decides which individuals deserve the fruits of
another’s labor. Individual property
rights have essentially been done away with.
“The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part
and unconstitutional in part. The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an
exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause,” (Chief Justice) Roberts
wrote. “That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to
order individuals to engage it. In this case, however, it is reasonable to
construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain
amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation
is within Congress’s power to tax.”
“Roberts stressed that the decision does not speak
to the merits of the law. “We do not consider whether the act embodies sound
policies. That judgment is entrusted to the nation's elected leaders,” he said.”
Justice Roberts may as easily have said, “We don’t need no
stinkin’ Preamble to the Constitution to remind us of our stewardship to secure
the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. Let the next election decide if we are going
to be responsible; we’re doing the best we can with our blind folds on.”
We now live in a collective socialistic society where
government decides which individuals deserve entitlements and equates such
injustices with other common interests such as national defense. Individual property rights have essentially
been done away with. Government can
establish any program deemed appropriate and fund it through taxation
regardless of the damage done to the nation’s ability to sustain such programs;
passing excessive debt onto future generations and robbing even them of their
right to private property.
Never mind our Founding Father’s thoughtfully constructed Preamble
to the Constitution which instructs government representatives to, “Secure the
Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”; the Supreme Court doesn’t
need to refer to these fundamental purposes when ruling on important
cases. History has proven the Preamble
is simply a useless paragraph placed in front of some other words on an antique piece of
parchment, a flexible document which has outlived its usefulness.