Sunday, March 06, 2005

Congress shall make no laws.........

Bill of Rights Amendment I:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."


Look closely at the above amendment. Do you see anything regarding separation of church and state? No? That’s because it isn’t there.

Now, before I dive headlong into to this post, allow me, please, to say that after years of wrestling with this, I have concluded that if the “separation clause” was, indeed, in the Constitution, I could probably support it. As it is, I haven’t that choice… because it simply isn’t there.

The Supreme Court is deciding an issue, I happen to believe, they have no authority to even consider. I refer, of course, to the case of the Ten Commandments displayed on public property, namely courthouse lawns and such. Elsewhere in the Constitution, it is plainly stated that if it is not in the Constitution, then the matter is left up to the states. Anything.

This issue should be a state matter… decided by each separate state’s legislatures and, when necessary, their state courts.

What we have here is another case of the Supreme Court assuming powers it doesn’t have…again. When will the Congress grow the cajones to rein in that runaway court?

Maybe the time has come (if not, it is surely approaching) when we have to convene a Constitutional Convention and clear up a few things. One would be to amend the Constitution to allow term limits for ALL Federal Judges including the Supreme Court Justices. The insulation of "lifetime appointments" has the effect of cutting them off from any contact with the real world, outside their tiny little world, and results in a disconnect with the American people. The same thing has happened to Congress. The answer to the Congressional disconnect? Term limits. Well, guess what, the Courts ruled Term Limits are unconstitutional. I wonder why.

We are faced again with the oligarchy thing. Our freedoms are being eroded away and we have no recourse. To continue along this course is bound to end in a very unpleasant mess. I would advise the government to review the events of
the 1850’s with even closer attention to the events of 1861 through 1865. The underlying cause of that unpleasant period was overbearing government. The Congress and the Federal Judiciary would do well to consider that period in our history because, as we all know, history has a way of repeating itself. The US government didn’t believe it could happen then, either.

The people must have recourse. We are well past being tired of the legislation coming out of the Federal Courts, including the Supreme Court.

The great unwashed, out here in the hinterlands, have begun the inevitable rumbling and the momentum will only build. Congress would do well to be attentive to these dissatisfied constituents and put the brakes on the Federal Courts. Congress has the power. The question is, are they men, and women, enough to do it?

Your Obedient Servant,

“Longstreet”

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

The separation doctrine flows from the guarantees you site in the constitution prohibiting congress from establishing a religion or interfering with the freedom of worship. When government puts the 10 commandements up at the courthouse it is stateing its preference for one particular religion to the exclusion of others. That leads to government starting to interfere with freedome of religion of those that don't subscribe to the 10 commandments. That's the origin of the separation provision.
But it is refreshing to see you advocate for state and local control. That is where conservative have historically held the high ground in the US.

Longstreet said...

Thanks for your encouraging comment.

I'm an old "State's Righter" from way back!

I do not believe the Constitution clearly states a seperation of state and relgion. The county governemets, placing those commandments on the courthouse grounds, were not attempting to establish a religion. Favor one over another... maybe. But, it is precisely at this point where, I believe, the Federal Governemt must back off. This is one of those powers left to the States in the 9th and 10th ammendments.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Amendment X

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
-0-

Now, having said that, if the Congress wishes... they may attempt to ammend the Constitution, again, and clear up this matter by spelling out clearly, and emphatically, the seperation of State and Religion. That would be fine with me. However, I do not believe, even if it cleared the full Congress, it would ever be ratified by the number of states required.

The Supreme Court has created a very hot issue which will not be settled in our lifetimes.

"Longstreet"