Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Conservatism and the Constitution..........

This is yet another piece written by ecc 10:20, otherwise known as Chakam:  I wonder what you think:
What is this almost mystical link between Conservatism and The US Constitution?
I say this as my opening salvo because I do not see liberalism touting the truth and strength of our Constitution, ever, to defend their ideals.  Conservatism, as strictly a “political ideal”, would die without it.  Time and again I see and hear Conservatism returning to the principles of our Constitution to refute and expose the dire policies and actions of our current administration and our current Congress, and the only retort the liberals can give is to insult us and call us names.  Why can’t liberalism go to The Constitution to defend itself from this Conservative line of questioning?
Is it that as Conservatives, we are non-revisionistic in our beliefs, ie, we don’t believe The Constitution is an “evolving document” that will reflect our current society and change with our flavor-of-the-month social whims?  Is it that The Constitution was indeed inspired by the Lord and His very Spirit is in the very words and principles of our Constitution, and to understand it one must first understand the Lord?  Please consider the following statements:
President John Adams said, “Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”
William Patterson, from New Jersey and an original signer of our Constitution said, “Religion and morality are necessary to good government, good order, and good laws, for when the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice.”
Take from these statements what you wish, but to me it is iron-clad proof, from men who were closer to the Constitution than anyone alive today, that there is an element of the Lord in our Constitution and in true government that cannot be escaped or ignored.  I believe when these men referenced “religion”, they were speaking of the Lord and King I worship today.  Oh, and it isn’t Obama, sorry.  My songs of praise don’t have his name in them.
Am I saying this is strictly a religious thing?  Am I saying that you cannot be a Conservative and not be a Christian?  Am I saying you cannot be a liberal and be a Christian?  Hardly.  That is a blanket statement I am not prepared to make.
However, on the issues of morality and religion, I would say that an atheist or a God-hater will have a hell of a time, (no pun intended), wrapping their heads around the ideals of our Constitution, and will probably view it much like the vampires in the old Hammer films from the 60′s when a cross is displayed:  They will hiss, recoil, and run away, plotting in themselves how they can destroy such an offensive object.  I have yet to see liberalism, when manifested in the words or actions of one of its followers, say anything positive about The US Constitution as it was written.
I mentioned before that liberalism views our Constitution as an “evolving” document.  Hmm…  “Evolving” into what, pray tell?  Things only evolve into better versions of what they were to begin with.  Is someone going to write a better Constitution than what we have today?  Curious.  I suppose then we could finally remove the whole “our Creator” thing from our Constitution and make sure humanity gets all the credit.
Liberalism depends upon emotionalism to find its identity, and Conservatism is far from being overly emotional or excitable when crossed.  And since liberalism is emotion-based, it has a lot of “gray area” in which it can zig and zag and use the excuse of, “Oh, that’s not what I really meant when I said….”.  Conservatism, on the other hand, is based upon fact, accountability, historical realities, and common sense.  None of those traits find themselves rooted in emotionalism or touchy-feely fancies.  Truth, to us, never changes and isn’t relative, but absolute.  Such is the “curse” of Conservatism, (he types with tongue-in-cheek.)
I believe it is the fact that we, as Conservatives, are rooted in these truths that the US Constitution means so much to us.  We rest in it.  We read it and find peace and comfort in it.  It is the only one of its kind- no other Nation on this planet has a Constitution like ours and no other Nation on this planet has an origin like ours.  It is as perfect today as it was when it was written.  We cling to our “guns and religion”, as so deftly put by a liberal, and are viewed as simpletons and hillbillies and rednecks who don’t know enough about the “really real world” of the liberal intellectual elitist.  Fah.
I’ve seen the fruits of the “really real world” that the liberals all espouse.  It is sorely lacking in morality and/or religion, (unless you consider protecting defenseless trees, whales, and frogs, yet discarding human babies into the trash bins behind your abortion mills religious activities of some sort).  I’ve seen the people who preach liberalism and their inability to answer concrete and definitive questions with solid answers during Town Hall meetings.  Not once did these liberals cite The US Constitution to uphold their ideals and policies.  Side note: If Mr. Obama is an expert on The Constitution, I would love to read anything he has written about it.
I would like to be wrong about this.  Even though liberals are complete opposites of who and what I am, they are still Americans.  Americans should know The US Constitution and be able to reference it when needed for the instruction and correction of those who fall by the wayside of emotional ignorance.  I wish that liberalism would embrace and drink from our Constitution.  Perhaps it would open their eyes to see that Conservatism isn’t all about “racsim, hate-mongering, ignorance, and anti-Obamaness”.  I would welcome any liberal who would wish to have an open debate with me regarding our Constitution and how it relates to government today.  However, I may as well be wishing for a pony on my next birthday.  It just won’t happen.
The connection between the US Constitution and Conservatism is simple enough:  The Founding Fathers were not Pelosi, Frank, Reid, Holder, etc.  The Founding Fathers were Conservatives who listened to the Lord and did not squander their new Nation, given to them by the Lord, with writing a useless and “evolving” document in which to govern it.  If we could somehow go back to the late 1700s, I wonder how our current politicians would be viewed and judged by our Founding Fathers?  But I digress…
I am a Conservative who has his feet planted firmly on The US Constitution in terms of proper governance, and I have my spirit rooted deeply in The Scriptures in terms of proper interaction with the world this side of Heaven, much like a large number of other Conservatives.  I cannot be a Conservative and hate The Constitution.  I cannot be a Conservative and view The Constitution as anything less than the pure inspiration and guidance of the Lord given to men to form this more Perfect Union.
You can view our Constitution without the spiritual eyes of a Christian, obviously.  You can even say that our Constitution is perfectly written and applicable in today’s modern world, even hundreds of years after it was written.  I still haven’t found a liberal who “gets it”, though.  I still haven’t found a liberal who can reason and apply our Constitution to even the smallest of their ideals.
Funny, that.
I suppose my intent on this article was to say, simply, that Conservatism is the champion of The US Constitution, while liberalism is the champion of, well, liberalism.  Whenever a person is shot there is usually an outcry to ban handguns by liberals.  How is this possible when our Constitution gives me the right to keep and bear arms?  The liberal doesn’t see this, nor will they.  An easy example, but effective nonetheless.  To the liberal our Constitution is a pesky nuisance and shouldn’t be interpreted as being viable to today’s modern world, since so many things have changed in the last 200 and some years.


Ducky's here said...

Exactly, your truth never changes.

It's hardly a matter of emotion vs. all that other but foundationalism vs. non-foundationalism.

The belief in immutable grounding truths vs. a mutable changing world. Actually that constant change as the ultimate immutable truth is the one we need to understand ... you always get back to first principles.

But the U.S, Constitution ain't it.
It is not revealed truth and maybe the big difference is the lefts rejection of revealed absolute truth.

Ducky's here said...

Whenever a person is shot there is usually an outcry to ban handguns by liberals. How is this possible when our Constitution gives me the right to keep and bear arms? The liberal doesn’t see this, nor will they.

Trying to put a propositional calculus on train wreck of a sentence we call the 2nd Amendment is a chore.

Where is your bias "regulated" or "not infringed".

As staunch a radical conservative as Robert Bork says it gives you the right to join a militia and nothing more.

Any way you look at it, it's lousy grammar.

Z said...

No the truth, real truth, never does change, Ducky.

And yes, it's all about emotion.
How do you think the liberals get away with the idiocies they're expounding nowadays?
Climate change FEELS scary! (let's make new york's elementary children have nightmares, THAT's the ticket)
Killing babies in utero is okay because it FEELS better than thinking a mother should be inconvenienced.
It FEELS better to call Conservatives racist than actually argue facts.
It FEELS better that the rest of the world's seeing the once great AMerica knocked on its butt by a liberal president apologizing and appeasing and calling US "Lazy".
It FEELS better ......we don't want other countries to FEEL we're exceptional (any more)
oh, yes..emotions are beguiling and dangerous when used like that.

Nice when you quote Conservatives you feel support your way of thinking and either out them as gay or insult them if they don't :-)

Anonymous said...

Geez, as a liberal, it's hard to comment here with the type of loony trash you post. I 'FEEL' Wingnuts are just plain crazy!

Z said...

liberaldude...give it a rest.
How many hours of commenting do you have to do to get your check?
ya, we're really insulted by your comments :-) :-) GOOD JOB! !!

sue hanes said...

Z - With all due respect to your position as blog administrator and with respect to your commenters - with an occasional exception in the case of Impertinent :-) - I heartily object to the insinuation - as a
Liberal - that I do not love and respect the Constitution of the United States of America.

Anonymous said...


Of course liberals hate this post. How could they not?

They demand the US Constitution change and evolve to reflect their immorality and Socialism, but this is an impossibility. A person would have better luck trying to piss up a kite string during a hurricane.

Conservatives understand the Constitution. It is part of who and what we are. The Democrat/Socialist Party has sought to destroy it for years and years, warping it and twisting it to make it speak for them, but to no avail. The only way to dominate the US Constitution is to destroy it and render it outdated and unsuitable for the New America of the Socialist Utopia.

Every argument I have had with a liberal regarding governance according to the US Constitution resulted in them becoming flustered and calling me either a racist, a right-wing terrorist, or a teabagger. *yawn* So tedious, indeed.

Pay no mind to these people and do not suffer it to answer them. They are not looking for dialogue. They are looking to be victims. It's in their blood, and they cannot help themselves. Hence, this is why they are liberals.

You rock, Z! Stay you, because you are the best Z there is! :)

Anonymous said...

@Sue Hanes,

I would like to apologize for the insinuation. I said what I said based on the myriad conversations I have had with liberals, and their complete inability to reason out rational conversation about this wonderful document.

I wish to extend an olive branch, and to also give an offer to have you visit my blog one day and perhaps we could have an honest sit-down and talk about the Constitution.

If you're willing, I am willing, too. :)

sue hanes said...

ecc102 - the thing is - ecc - you say you talked to Liberals - but you never talked to me.

I'm a Liberal - ecc.

And I would love to discuss the Constitution with you - right after I get my house in order.

Just kidding.

I will visit your blog.

I have legions of info on the Constitution - plus my own thoughts.

I will be checking out your blog and appreciate sincerely your peaceful efforts.

sue hanes said...

And furthermore ecc - although I sometimes act in an irrational way at best I am quite reasonable and rational.

I look forward to our discussions.

Anonymous said...


Looking forward to it!

Now I need to go and eat nachos while I watch an episode or two of Chopped from my DVR.

Anonymous said...

"although I sometimes act in an irrational way..."

Especially where I'm involved.

beamish said...

Show me the "conservative" that doesn't cry for their Granny if the suggestion is made we rid ourselves of unconstitutional Social Security or Medicare.

Show me the "conservative" that hates the existence of unconstitutional federally funded public schools more than that no one is teaching evangelical Christian theology in Geometry class.

Seems to me the Constitution isn't all that big of a refuge for partisan bickering, left or right, or a doctrinal maxim for social conservatives in particular.

Keep your gainsaying politics out of my limited government.

sue hanes said...

Z - the thing is - there's this black guy who is painting the guest room in my new house

he will be coming to finish the job his morning and i'm not sure what to tell him about thomas jefferson

you know - how he said all men are created equal then he went home to have his slaves pull off his boots and serve him tea

z - what should i tell him

btw z - i'll be writing the post that is dedicated to you today

please check it out - and any of your commenters are welcome at my blog also

Brooke said...

Sue, you're making a black guy do menial labor for a pittance?

You racist.

sue hanes said...

Brooke - I think you will appreciate this when I tell you that I am so stupid that I've been thinking about going downstairs where he is working and apologizing
for the likes of Thomas Jefferson.

I took down a bottle of water to him yesterday and again this morning.

He really seems to be most interested in getting the job done and getting the h*ll out of here.

However he does have a bumper sticker on his van:

afro-americans for obama - so that yieled a nice discussion

But yesterday when one of the locals - they are mostly Conserative although this is a Liberal Campus - saw the bumper sticker he started talking right away about handguns cause he thinks the car is mine.

There were a few tense moments after I told him he would have to leave his gun at the door and as it turns out he breeds snakes for a living.

So he chatted with my Conserative husband while the other nice young man told me about Alex Jones' website.

But I did try to talk up Bill Maher's new book - which neither of them were very interested in.

sue hanes said...

btw Brooke - $350 for one room - not what I would call a pittance.


I wanted to paint it myself but my husband said I am too old.

sue hanes said...

but I did reassure the - as it turns out - very nice Conservative guy that as President I will not be taking anybody's guns away.

but rather i will be more interested in keeping guns out of the hands of potential shooters

Z said...

"he will be coming to finish the job his morning and i'm not sure what to tell him about thomas jefferson

you know - how he said all men are created equal then he went home to have his slaves pull off his boots and serve him tea"

I think this is a perfect example of what ECC was saying in his excellent piece here: I'd not struggle at all with that. I'd tell him sometimes good people do things we don't approve of today and context is everything.
How about all the GOOD Jefferson did?
Tell him not to be naive and bless the ground he's on because of the opportunity afforded to him today, Sue.

Joe said...

To treat the Constitution like it is an outdatd document not relevant to today's world is to be too ignorant to understand its PRINCIPLES.

It IS a living, breathing document, but it is designed to breathe very slowly, by amendment, not by judicial whim.

It is our rule book, much like the rule book of the NFL.

Referees cannot change the rules in the middle of a game, and the Constitution cannot be changed in the middle of history.

There is a prescribed method for both.

Imagine if the NFL threw out the rule book in the middle of the game. There would be chaos.

If our Consitution is ignored, the same kind of chaos will result, and is in the process of doing so.

The Constitution is based on principles of freedom, fairness and limited government.

We need to keep it that way.

Lisa said...

I doubt highly we will ever see any writings from Obama's college years.
There is alot of money I believe able to keep things well hidden.
And amazingly our dumbed down society isn't even concerned. Goes back to those emotions deciding on which lever to pull in the voting booth. The one marked "Hope and Change"

Thersites said...

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Thersites said...

i'm not sure what to tell him about thomas jefferson

I'd tell him that Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, not the U.S. Constitution. He was in France having a good time w/Sally when Congress including Hamilton, et al, sold out her people in Phildelphia. As a Virginia legislator, he had written a bill preventing MORE slaves from being imported into Virginia... and as an agrarian, he knew better than to one day liberate all the chickens that had lived their entire lives in his chicken coop. He had a pretty good reason to believe that they would have difficulty surviving w/o his "patronage". And given how Jefferson died "broke" himself, I suppose that it was a pretty fair presumption.

Thersites said...

btw - In 1776, the colonists in America weren't fighting to replace a King in London with a King of America in DC.

Anonymous said...

"you know - how he said all men are created equal then he went home to have his slaves pull off his boots and serve him tea"

This is all so stupid. None of us have any idea how to determine what the mindset and practices of people ...that were acceptable in the 18th or 19th centuries from our 21st century revisionism.

All this shoulda, woulda, coulda. It was rectified...it was abolished. Move on.

Sure...we don't like slavery today. It's unacceptable. But how can we judge 200 years ago?

Todays slavery? Minimum wage earners in Burger King cap and Mickey D caps.

What will they say about this 200 years from now?

Lisa said...

Ted Kennedy left a woman to die in a car at the bottom of a lake,but then he advocated for Universal Health Care so I guess that makes him....?

sue hanes said...

Impertinent - I see your point.

But no one tells me to move on until I am ready to move on.

But I do move on - when I am ready.

And then I am sure.

In fact - I am forming up a thought of moving on about the subject at hand.

I may be posting about that soon.

Anonymous said...

" In 1776, the colonists in America weren't fighting to replace a King in London with a King of America in DC."

Not wholeheartedly... but since there was never a "President" before....some wanted a King. That's all they knew. And there was substantial and heated discussion over the way he should be addressed.

"Your Excellency...your Majesty" and so on. I think it was GW himself who said...Mr. President?