If you stay away from the mainstream media, you will hear stories nearly everyday of how our constitutional rights are being eroded. The perpetrators of these attacks are usually our elected officials who would rather serve their own interests or a global collectivist agenda instead of the people that elected them to office. But there are still people who value and defend the Constitution.

Oath Keepers is trying to organize men and women who have served in the Armed Forces, or who are currently serving, and encourage them to hold true to the oath they swore to defend the Constitution of the United States. In addition to veterans, any citizen of the United States is welcome to join as an associate member to find ways to serve.

I highly recommend this organization to anyone concerned with protecting our republic from its enemies, foreign and domestic.

This is a question I’ve been asking myself lately. What is freedom?

I grew up thinking that I live in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. But lately, I’m not so sure anymore. There are pundits galore to tell us about the problems in our government, or with big business, or with our way of life. But I almost never hear them talking about the simple values that make America special. Like freedom.

I am fortunate enough to work at a company that has brought in bright people from all over the world. Even though this brings up many personal issues for me, like why do they hire someone from another country, when I live here and can do the job just as well? But I still feel fortunate to meet people from many cultures and learn from them. So why are these bright people coming to America?

Opportunity

So is opportunity a form of freedom? I believe so, yes. Our founding fathers believed that given the opportunity, decent people can govern themselves. That they could find ways to prosper together, band together to defend themselves from aggressors that would do them harm, and pursue their own vision of happiness. Our system of government gives us the opportunity to pursue happiness in whatever way we see fit, with the exception of things that would harm others.

Even at the time these weighty matters were being debated before the assembly that would generate our Constitution, there were two competing views on whether people could govern themselves. There were those who said that people were incapable of governing themselves, and that there should be a strong central government to make sure that people did the right things. After all, this was how things had always been done within monarchies.

But there was another view of the issue, and fortunately for us, that view won out in the end. It was the view espoused by men such as Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin, that good men could in fact govern themselves. That a people that held a firm reliance on a guiding principle could make good decisions for themselves and arrive at a successful society. And we have for more than two hundred years. The important part of the equation is the firm reliance on a higher guiding principle. A firm reliance on God, whichever view of God you follow and however you choose to worship him or her, or even them. The view of God is less important than the belief in a higher power that encourages a person to think about right and wrong. Guidance that helps people do the right thing, not for personal gain, but because they believe it is the right thing to do.

The founding fathers believed that telling people what to do and how to live their lives limited their freedom, and that left unchecked would lead to a repressive government virtually indistinguishable from slavery. And yet, this debate continues today. You can find elements of this debate in the core principles of our current political parties: Republicans want to maintain opportunity and the ability to succeed or fail on your own merits, and Democrats believe that it is the job of government to protect the people by choosing the right course of action on their behalf.

Neither party is without fault, and so too, neither party is without merit. Because it still up to the individual in this nation to decide what is right. I learned early in life that when someone tells me how terrible my circumstances are and how I am being abused by something over which I have no power, I need to keep a hand on my wallet and watch my freedom. We all have the freedom to succeed. It’s just that many folks in our society are being told that they cannot succeed without help from the government.

Slavery

“Here, let us build a ramp to get you up those stairs. They’re much too difficult for someone like you.”

“These choices are much too difficult for an ordinary person to make. Let us guide you.”

Statements like these enslave a person’s soul. They tell you that you are less than the person speaking to you. They tell you to stay in your place and let your betters handle things. This is not what I believe is a core value in America. Or at least, I believe this should not be a value here.

This is slavery. There are no whips and chains today; no nets to capture members of a racial or political group so that they may become the servants of another group. Just words and ideas. Words and ideas that degrade others so that self-proclaimed elites can exert control and gain status. Witty comments about people may gain laughter when used innocently; but they soon turn sour when they begin to persuade people that the target is less than human.

Opportunity is a core value in America. The opportunity to succeed or fail based on your own efforts. The opportunity to compete with others and become better by competing. I remember the thrill of earning a merit badge in Boy Scouts, or a trophy when I competed in karate long ago. But my son now receives tokens of participation from school events. Our children are told that they are all the same. That no one shall fail because they are all special. It’s as if the people (whomever they are) that are deciding how we shall live are trying to dumb us down, to make us no better than herd animals to be managed.

So where do you stand? Do you believe that government knows better than the individual that elects them? Do you believe that people are basically good, and that when guided by a moral belief they can govern themselves? Do you stand as a human that possesses a unique soul and mind? Or are you just a member of the herd? Only you can decide, and only if you are the one making the choice.

You can’t say “Christmas” anymore in public, unless you want to appear a rebel. Certainly not if you are in public service. Children are punished for bringing religious symbols into schools, such as Christmas trees and candy canes. All in the name of separation of Church and State.

This whole idea is become one of my pet peeves. The concept of the separation of Church and State does not appear anywhere in the founding documents of our nation. That’s right, every time you hear someone say that the Constitution provides for the separation of Church and State, they are at best mistaken, and at worst lying. This is an example of progressive selective constitutionality.

I remember being disturbed by the apparent insanity of these claims when I was a child. As a kid in junior high school, I sang in the boys choir and truly enjoyed the experience. Early in the Fall we would begin learning the songs that we would perform for the Christmas concert. I think my first year with the choir they changed the name to “holiday” concert due to some complaints. That one felt a bit silly, but I could understand (even at that age) that the word holiday was more inclusive for other religions. I had friends that were Jewish and I knew this change would make it easier to describe a concert that would include songs for Hanukah as well as for Christmas. Our director was always careful to include songs from various cultures and faiths.

Toward the end of my time in junior high, Christmas songs were being removed from the “Winter” concert altogether. In high school, if we wanted a Christmas song it had to be completely secular and even then it could be pulled from the program at the last minute at the slightest complaint. What a way to express the proper holiday spirit.

Whenever I heard someone complain about the people requiring us to pull these faith-based songs from our repertoire, the answer was always that there must be a separation of Church and State. Now we even have commentators on “public” radio apologizing for using the word “Christmas” in describing a party.

This is wrong. This is ridiculous. This is dangerous.

The phrase “separation of Church and State” does not appear anywhere in the Declaration of Independence or in the Constitution. This idea did not come from the foundation of American law. Most people agree that the original mention of this was made by Thomas Jefferson in a private essay, but they also agree that his intent paralleled the First Amendment in preventing the federal government from founding a state religion. This was all he meant by the separation of Church and State.

So keep this in mind the next time you hear someone ordering a student to remove a sweater that has a Christmas tree on the front, or people singing a Christmas carol near a government office being told to be quiet and disperse. Separation of Church and State is merely a tool to gain greater control and power by diminishing the stature of faith in our nation.

Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, Happy Kwanza

I hope you have a wonderful holiday whatever your chosen path to divinity.

This election is one of the most important elections in the history of the Republic. I highly encourage you to express your opinion on the course our nation will follow in the next few years.

Please do not trust the mainstream media as your only source of information. Look it up for yourself, whether it is the actual wording of proposed laws or the historical significance behind the claims made by either party. America stands at a crossroad, and we will stand or fall by the path we choose.

I am heartened by the candidates that are aligning with the values of the Tea Party. Many of these folks are campaigning entirely on issues and leaving the mud-slinging to their opponents. There are a lot of lies out in the popular media. I encourage you again to investigate the truth for yourself.

Please, for the sake of our children, don’t sit this one out. Your vote does matter, and your voice should be heard.

How many times have you found yourself telling someone else to do something that you won’t do yourself? This may be most common in your own family (I’m thinking about parents, here) especially when trying to rein-in the behavior of children who don’t yet understand right and wrong the same way that you do. Imagine a father smoking a cigarette and telling his young teenage son that he shouldn’t smoke.

The son replies, “But you’re smoking right now!”

“That rule doesn’t apply to me,” the father says.

You can probably identify with the kid’s feelings. Rules that don’t apply equally always feel unfair; they just seem wrong, don’t they? When you are raising a smart child, smart enough to ask questions about your behavior as it relates to what you’re telling them to do, you find yourself evaluating rules before you impose them on your kids. Asking yourself, “Would I be willing to do this too?” I would make the bold prediction that you will have fewer arguments over rules if your child can look at your behavior and find an example of the rule being carried out, instead of finding that you have exempted yourself from the rule they are expected to live by.

I hope that most of you are nodding to yourselves right now, thinking that’s the way you believe, too. I learned early to think about the examples my actions or inactions would set for my son, and to try hard to change habits that I didn’t want him to learn. We learn best from watching the actions of the people we look to for leadership and wisdom. Oops, I probably just tipped my hand as to the direction this article is heading.

Above the law?

Did you realize that it has become standard practice for our lawmakers to exclude themselves from the laws they create?

Read that again and think about it. How do you feel, knowing that they are creating laws “for our own good” that will never be applied to them? One of the things that was in the recent “Obama-care” health bill was a provision to exclude Congress from the law. When people objected, it was removed. BUT, it was later re-added quietly just before the bill was passed. How can any law that applies only to citizens other than those who hold the public offices responsible for creating the law be fair and just?

And it isn’t only health care. I’m torn between wanting to find out for myself how many laws have provisions for the lawmakers to opt-out of the law, and a deep dislike for reading and analyzing legalese. I will be looking for these clauses in any bill that Congress deigns to let us read before they vote on it. If I find such a clause, I will be writing and phoning my Representative and Senators and letting them know just how I feel about them telling me what’s good for me but not good enough for them.

Speak out early and speak out often if you think this practice should be stopped. Maybe someday we can turn America back into a nation that We the People will recognize and trust.

I was reading an article on Computerworld.com today on the proposal to shift some money away from subsidizing telephones to subsidizing broadband Internet access to rural areas. More specifically, the article was describing statements by U.S. Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that there is no need for the federal government to provide this as a utility. I found myself ambivalent toward the opinions expressed by the author; part of me wants fast Internet for rural areas, yet another part asks if this is something the government should do.

I hope someday to live in a rural setting far away from the noise and hassles of the city or suburbs. My wife and I talk about whether we would rather live near the ocean or the mountains, yet in either case we are talking about finding a place that is quiet and beautiful. My biggest requirement is that I have high speed Internet access. What I don't see in this article I referred to, is that you have options for satellite Internet connections already, virtually anywhere in the United States, and that 3G and 4G services are spreading all the time. So why the push to correct this great inequality? The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) wants to pay for expansion of Internet to rural communities as a right. They make it sound as if those of us that have Internet connections are unfairly abusing those of us who do not.

This gets closer to the core of the matter for me: is Internet access as right? Did the Founding Fathers write about Life, Liberty, and Fast Broadband Access? If they did, I must have missed that part. Yes, having access to fast Internet in rural communities is a great idea that would be embraced by roughly the same percentage of people that have access to it now: estimates put broadband availability at 95% of American homes, and of those approximately 65% take advantage of it. Hmm, that's odd, that doesn't sound as though every American requires fast Internet in order to live a productive and happy life. Many do have access and still choose not to use it.

This seems like another waste of government time and money masquerading as a good idea. Yes, broadband access is good. No, I do not believe that the federal government should provide it as a right. It is a tool and a priviledge, it is not a right.

There is a lot of talk since President Obama’s idea of health care reform passed into law about the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:

Amendment 10

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.

The main argument being made about the health care bill as it relates to the Tenth Amendment is that the bill requires citizens to purchase adequate health insurance whether or not they want to. This is being described as a violation of the Tenth, because nowhere in the Constitution is this power granted to the Federal Government. According to this amendment, the Feds cannot force citizens, or states, to purchase any product under a penalty. The powers that be think they are getting around the Tenth Amendment by saying the penalty for not buying insurance is actually going to be a tax. This is why they are creating all those new jobs in the Internal Revenue Service, so that they have enough people to scan through everyone’s insurance records and verify that they have purchased enough.

Apparently, no one in Congress remembers the last time there was a major argument over the rights of states versus the Federal Government. That was why the South seceded from the Union, and what sparked the Civil War. It wasn’t originally about slavery at all; it was about States Rights.

Makes me wonder what Congress thinks about that inaugural oath they all took to defend and uphold the Constitution.

I just spent the first half of my day watching TV. My time was divided between the excellent documentary on the History channel, WWII in HD, and various news and opinion shows. The result was that I was in a deeply emotional and patriotic mood from seeing the sacrifices made by my father's generation so that I could raise my family in freedom, and then contemplating the mamoth document that is the Senate health care bill.
 
If you are in any doubt about this bill, I urge you to spend some time reading through the Constitution for yourself, to see if you can see where health care is guaranteed to our people. For the short version, here are the stated powers of our government:

The Constitution has been on my mind a lot in recent months, as is true for a growing number of people in the United States. No matter your personal political affiliation, you probably feel that our rights have been eroding for some time. My wife and I are home schooling our son, which has given us many opportunities to discuss the vents in the news. After a somewhat spirited discussion over our feeling that political correctness is a direct attack on our freedom of speech, my wife suggested that I take my my opinions online to share them with others. She also suggested that my son and I could do this as a joint project. It still remains to be seen whether I will get him to help, but I'll keep trying.
I really don't intend this to be another political opinion blog, though I'm sure that some of my opinions will inevitably creep into my writing. So right up front I want to be clear that what I write here is my opinion, it is not news and it is not endorsed by or affiliated with any organization. In the same vein, I am not a lawyer, nor am I an expert in Constitutional law. Yes, I may actually be wrong sometime but I'll do my best to avoid that.

Goals of this blog

The title of the blog refers to the way in which our daily lives are affected by the US Constitution; please don't take it to mean that I will be providing insightful updates on a daily basis. My goal is to post at least once each week.
While still in start-up mode with this blog, I'll be posting larger chunks of reference-type content. Once that is done, my intent is to focus on a small piece of the Constitution and write about my thoughts on that topic, the way it applies to something in current events, or to examine the meaning of the text.
My primary goal in writing this blog is to encourage American citizens to discuss their own freedoms and rights, thereby learning to value these treasures before they are taken from us. I hope that other people will eventually begin to contribute, and the idea will spread.