kdown
October 11th, 2007, 03:17 PM
Source: GunTruths
Published: FR Post 18-AUG-01 Author: Steve Silver
Do Not Mourn The Loss Of Freedom:
We Have the Government We Deserve
In, "A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law" Justice Antonin Scalia suggests our Constitution is dying. He shows that through irresponsible legislation and even more irresponsible judicial activism, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are no longer the sound foundations for a democracy. Rather, they have been whittled away to irrelevant and meaningless documents of little more than historical interest.
On the other hand, self-proclaimed scholars see the Constitution as a "living document;" a document which changes and grows with the needs, wants and desires of the country. This metamorphosis occurs through the judicial branch, and primarily the Supreme Court. Of course, as Justice Scalia eloquently pointed out, there are no standards to govern or limit this "growth." In fact, the people have no oversight at all. Federal judges are not elected, they answer to no one, and they are employed for life (unless, of course, they commit overt criminal acts). They can do whatever they want from the bench, and the people have no recourse.
While scholars debate the scope of the Constitution, one conclusion is unavoidable: over the last half century, the power and size of the federal government has mushroomed astronomically. This, in and of itself, would not necessarily be bad except that it has come at the expense of individual Americans' freedom. And that is where the problem lies.
Some suggest we are freer today than ever in our country's history, and freer than any other people on earth. This, of course, depends upon how "freedom" is defined.
To be sure, we are "free" from the worry of planning our own retirement because the government has forced us to participate in the social security program (even if it is going bankrupt). We are "free" from the responsibilities of defending our families: we need only pick up the telephone, punch 911, and a police officer eventually arrives to do it for us (or write down what happened if he is too late). We are "free" from the burden of educating our children because we need only drop them off at public schools (never mind the fact their minds are being filled with politically correct mush).
We are "free" of the moral obligation of helping our less-fortunate neighbors because our government does it with money it takes from us in the form of taxes. We are "free" from having to decide for ourselves what is right and wrong: the government has legislated it for us. We are even "free" from the unpleasant consequences of our own sexual improprieties. We simply need go to the doctor and have our potential offspring and/or any newly contracted venereal diseases eliminated.
Of course, our forefathers did not enjoy these "freedoms." Instead, being men (and women) of true principle and character, they readily accepted the responsibility of ensuring their own safety and well-being, as well as that of their families, neighbors and communities. They recognized the timeless truth that personal freedom goes hand-in-hand with personal responsibility. And this is the bedrock upon which they based Constitution.
Against this background, it is therefore interesting to consider how the Framers of the Constitution would react if, on December 16, 1791, the day after the Bill of Rights was ratified, they were suddenly faced with all the federal laws which are on the books today.
(Source (http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b7f33ca1f9b.htm))
Published: FR Post 18-AUG-01 Author: Steve Silver
Do Not Mourn The Loss Of Freedom:
We Have the Government We Deserve
In, "A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law" Justice Antonin Scalia suggests our Constitution is dying. He shows that through irresponsible legislation and even more irresponsible judicial activism, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are no longer the sound foundations for a democracy. Rather, they have been whittled away to irrelevant and meaningless documents of little more than historical interest.
On the other hand, self-proclaimed scholars see the Constitution as a "living document;" a document which changes and grows with the needs, wants and desires of the country. This metamorphosis occurs through the judicial branch, and primarily the Supreme Court. Of course, as Justice Scalia eloquently pointed out, there are no standards to govern or limit this "growth." In fact, the people have no oversight at all. Federal judges are not elected, they answer to no one, and they are employed for life (unless, of course, they commit overt criminal acts). They can do whatever they want from the bench, and the people have no recourse.
While scholars debate the scope of the Constitution, one conclusion is unavoidable: over the last half century, the power and size of the federal government has mushroomed astronomically. This, in and of itself, would not necessarily be bad except that it has come at the expense of individual Americans' freedom. And that is where the problem lies.
Some suggest we are freer today than ever in our country's history, and freer than any other people on earth. This, of course, depends upon how "freedom" is defined.
To be sure, we are "free" from the worry of planning our own retirement because the government has forced us to participate in the social security program (even if it is going bankrupt). We are "free" from the responsibilities of defending our families: we need only pick up the telephone, punch 911, and a police officer eventually arrives to do it for us (or write down what happened if he is too late). We are "free" from the burden of educating our children because we need only drop them off at public schools (never mind the fact their minds are being filled with politically correct mush).
We are "free" of the moral obligation of helping our less-fortunate neighbors because our government does it with money it takes from us in the form of taxes. We are "free" from having to decide for ourselves what is right and wrong: the government has legislated it for us. We are even "free" from the unpleasant consequences of our own sexual improprieties. We simply need go to the doctor and have our potential offspring and/or any newly contracted venereal diseases eliminated.
Of course, our forefathers did not enjoy these "freedoms." Instead, being men (and women) of true principle and character, they readily accepted the responsibility of ensuring their own safety and well-being, as well as that of their families, neighbors and communities. They recognized the timeless truth that personal freedom goes hand-in-hand with personal responsibility. And this is the bedrock upon which they based Constitution.
Against this background, it is therefore interesting to consider how the Framers of the Constitution would react if, on December 16, 1791, the day after the Bill of Rights was ratified, they were suddenly faced with all the federal laws which are on the books today.
(Source (http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b7f33ca1f9b.htm))