Following on my last post, I’d like to add a condensed version of my understanding of the Constitution. The people of Wyoming are considered sovereigns, as all Americans are, which means that the people are the source of power in America.
The terms laws of nature and nature’s God are stated at the beginning of the Declaration of Independence. The Latin word for nature is birth. We are by nature born equal. All men are created equal means just that.
Lincoln, in the Lincoln-Douglas debates explained it this way: He argued that when you look at a Black person and a White person, they appear different. But when you look at a Black person and a White person and a hog, it’s self-evident that the two people of different colors are equal in nature, each different in nature only from the hog. The equality of our nature is shown by what nature it is not equal to.
If one wants to argue that hogs are made of atoms and people are made of atoms, therefore people and hogs are equal by nature, I would say that we’re not establishing a government of hogs but of people. The Constitution applies to governance of people by our own nature. Would a hog even agree to being governed? 🙂
Because all persons are equal in nature, no White can own a Black and no king (like King George at the time of the American Revolution) can rule over the people. This also excludes a person of “privilege” of any kind from ruling over an equal people. This is at the heart of why America declared independence from King George and then created a Constitution upon the two principles of nature and equality and governance by representation, separation of powers and limited government.
A republic was set up in America and not a democracy. A democracy allows a majority to rule over a minority. A republic allows the people, as sovereigns, to hold the source of power. The people then give their consent, as a whole and equal people, to their representative government who are separated in power in order to prevent the hoarding of power by any branch or executive.
The government is limited in power to securing and protecting the interests of our equal people, not to invading our lives with REGULATIONS as to what we can do, what we can’t do, when we can or can’t do it, how we can or can’t do it or where we can or can’t do it and to expand SURVEILLANCE everywhere to catch what we’re doing or not doing.
These rules only make ENFORCEMENT of the rules even more invasive. If we break one of these thousands and thousands of rules, then we lose our property, our savings, our good names and we likely go to JAIL (and how difficult would that be with rules against everything?). Where’s the liberty and freedom to follow our dreams in this scenario?
Lincoln also stated: “Free labor argues that, as the Author of man makes every individual with one head and one pair of hands, it was probably intended that heads and hands should cooperate as friends; and that that particular head, should direct and control that particular pair of hands. As each man has one mouth to be fed, and one pair of hands to furnish food, it was probably intended that that particular pair of hands should feed that particular mouth — that each head is the natural guardian, director, and protector of the hands and mouth inseparably connected with it; and that being so, every head should be cultivated, and improved, by whatever will add to its capacity for performing its charge. In one word Free Labor depends on universal education.”
Simply put, Lincoln says that universal education allows the head to place food into the hands which in turn place the food into the mouth. People are equal and should and can educate themselves, with a representative government simply there to protect their right to govern their own bodies and lives — liberty.
When I hear so much today of the heads being chopped off in Mexico (thousands of them) and other countries, including the U.S., I imagine that it’s not just a matter of these madmen ending their victims’ lives, but it’s also a matter of separating the governing force of their bodies. In ending their lives, they’re ending their independence. When people want to take our ability to govern ourselves away from us and lord a government over us, it’s a similar thing. Metaphorically, our heads as sovereigns are being chopped off.
James Madison rightly stated that if men were angels, there would be no need for government. Men are equal in nature to each other but not to the nature of angels or of hogs. Therefore, government is necessary, balanced and limited so as to prevent “non-angels” from tyranny over the people.
Those who oppose a constitutional republic do so on the basis that history is a process of change and CIRCUMSTANCE. They argue that times have changed, therefore our governmental process must also change with whatever circumstances we find ourselves in.
They argue that scientists and AUTHORITIES are more capable of making governmental decisions than are the everyday people of America. This implies that people are not, in fact, equal. It implies that there is a privileged class of experts or ELITE who are more capable of managing power than an equal or sovereign people who are equal in nature.
If people are, in fact, equal in nature, then it follows that no person or persons can be above another person. If that is true, then a republic is the best system of government for preserving our nature and equality.
It can only be true that a republic is not the best system if it is also true that all people are not equal by nature, as the people of the first choice have to believe by desiring the rule of an elite, specialized class over a LOWER CLASS.
One either believes that we are equal, or they don’t.
In the next election, there is one CHOICE that matters above all. Do we want to revise or abolish our Constitution according to changes of circumstances in our history, or do we CHOOSE to keep our constitutional republic which has worked so well for 236 years to keep power in the hands of the people with a balance of powers to keep “non-angels” from imposing tyranny over a people who are equal in nature by race, religion, sexual orientation or otherwise. Our constitutional government has worked for 236 years but is in a clear and tangible danger today.
I believe that we are equal and that no person or persons have a right to lord power over the people. I believe that we can, in fact, educate ourselves to govern ourselves — liberty.
There is only one presidential candidate who has consistently held the above view, and that is Ron Paul. President Obama desires a governmental elite class with a BUREAUCRATIC, ADMINISTRATIVE government over the people, and the other three remaining Republican candidates: Romney, Santorum and Gingrich desire a capitalistic/corporate/industrial military complex ELITE government over the people.
Ron Paul has consistently fought for a simple, limited and representative government with balanced powers and sovereign citizens who “own” the source of power in our country. He wants AGRESSION against other countries only when that country represents a direct threat to our country, not whenever we decide to impose democracies in other countries.
How odd it is to me when we attempt to impose democracies in other countries when our own government is a republic. For me, this is proof that the center left and center right, who have governed seemingly forever, desire a majority rule over the minority, throughout the world, clearly indicating that they do not believe in equality of mankind by their nature. This is because a people who are equal by nature do not impose governing over other countries as if the people of those countries were not also equal to us by nature.
If they want to kill us, then we have a right to kill them before they succeed in the job, but not otherwise. Personally, I would have our friends across the border, the drug lords, vaporized. If they are a threat to any of an equal people, as they have shown they are, then they are a threat to the rest of an equal people.
Ron Paul stands alone against all other candidates.
[all bold emphasis added.]