Today I spoke to my friend Doug. Over the course of the conversation, Doug asked me,”where in the Constitution does it say that the government doesn't have the power to control how an American spends his or her money?” My friend was interested in what one federal Judge ruled against President Brock Obama's health plan, which was recently been defeated in Congress. I thought about it and told Doug: “The Constitution is there to protect the rights of the people and not to give the government more power, if anything the Constitution puts limits on what the government can and can't do”. I then referred Doug to the 10th Amendment; which says, “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.” I then told my friend that sometimes what is not there is just as important as what is. For example, here in Portland and Vancouver, the courts continually give law enforcement a free pass to violate a persons civil rights.
The pattern of braking the law to enforce it, may be traced back to a landmark case in 1952's U.S. Supreme Court case known as Frisbie Verses Collins. This case established an unfortunate precedent that now allows “the defendant to be put on trail, even if Law Enforcement broke the Law in bringing the defendant into the court's jurisdiction”(Chaos, 1). It almost seems as if the U.S. Supreme Court, who has authorized kid napping and abductions to enforce the law, does not want to be restricted be the confines of the Constitution they were sworn to up hold.
You see the Constitution is based on Natural Law, which requires a little bit of moral judgement for its interpretation. “With in the confines of Natural Law or more specificly the United States Constitution, legislatures have limitations imposed upon them”(Chaos, xii). But at the conception of our Constitution, the charter was met with a lot of resistance.
“Critics of Natural Law argue that it is anti-democratic because it prevents the majority from achieving its purpose”(Chaos, xiv). But the fact that the majority is concerned that their purpose will not achieved must always be suspect: for the popular vote rarely has the best interest of the majority in mind. Furthermore, “these critics contend, since the Natural Law is not written down anywhere in precise legal language, it is impossible to tell what rights are protected by the Natural Law and what are not”(Chaos, xiv). But the truth is Natural Law is nothing more than the Law of Mosses found in the Bible, so the Critics second argument fails under scrutiny. Our Natural Law is in fact written and has been read for thousands of years.
“Amazingly, infuriatingly, incredibly, the [American] government will lie, cheat, and steal in order to enforce their own laws”(Chaos, 1), according to Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, in his book Constitutional Chaos. On the other hand, it should not be of any surprise to any American that, “We the People...” are losing our freedom. For in spite of warnings against the dangers of democracy by our Founding Fathers, modern America still thinks that we can do better with out a charter. Hence the government once based on Natural Law has become an Existential culture. Which believes that our strength of virtue is found with in ones self or not at all. Such a philosophy leads to a government structure based on Positivism.
Positivism is for all practical purposes the opposite of Natural Law. Under this school of thought, the law is what ever the presiding authority says. Positivism requires that all laws be written down, and that there are no theoretical or artificial restraints (such as basic morals) on the ability of a popularly elected government to enact whatever laws it wishes. The problem with any popular government is the majority has always failed to work with in any confines of moral virtue. If child pornography is popular, for example, it becomes legal. It is for this reason a charter becomes necessary to help combat the majority.
Note, This next example is found at (NAB, Exodus 32):
When the Hebrew people were lost in the wilderness, they created a golden caff to worship. At which point, in a fit of rage Mosses destroyed the charter that God gave his people. The Hebrew people knew what they did was wrong but out of fear the majority reverted back to a tradition they felt comfortable with. Democratic rule can only work if the people involved are righteous.
It seems the harder modern America tries to achieve a separation of church and state, the more screwed up our culture gets. The very people who are meant to protect our way of life (the Supreme Court) are becoming this countries greatest enemy, when it comes to protecting our way of life (the Constitution). Natural Law is out lined through out the book of Exodus and it is the foundation of our Constitution. With out God in the center of American government our country is doomed to fail.