"Government should serve everyone, not a special class" is the headline for a letter to the editor in today's Peoria Journal Star. The letter was written in response to a letter I wrote to the editor saying that the U.S. Constitution does not have the phrase "wall between church and state." I further challenged anyone to demonstrate where that phrase is written in the Constitution.
The letter to the editor begins by saying, "It is, of course, true that the U.S. Constitution does not contain the words 'wall of separation' between church and state." The next line of the letter begins with "However." Then the letter gives a noble philosophy stating "that one person may not interfere with another person's life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness." However, that goal as noble as it is; is impossible to achieve as long as man has not submitted to GOD'S will. The only way it could be possible is if every single person agrees on what is involved in life, liberty, and happiness and every single person agrees to honor the agreement. The very purpose of government is to restrict some people's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. Every government interferes with someone's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness to protect the majority. Every Constitution, every law, every rule, every regulation interferes with someone's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. If they did not, they would not be necessary!
If in my pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness I choose to murder someone who gets in my way or just because murdering someone makes me happy; the government has laws to punish me for committing murder. My liberty and happiness is restricted to give someone else the possibility of life. If in my pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness I choose to steal; government has laws to prevent me from stealing. If in my pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness I choose to drive 90 miles an hour; government has laws to restrict how fast I drive. The very purpose of all laws is to restrict some people's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness for the good of society and, in some cases, to protect individuals from themselves.
There are, of course, thousands and thousands of examples. I will mention three and then a fourth using the source the author quoted. Recently a U.S. district court judge in California ruled that the phrase "under GOD" in the Pledge of Allegiance was in violation of the U.S. Constitution. That ruling gave some individuals the ability to more freely pursue their concept of life, liberty, and happiness. However, that same ruling restricted the freedom of others to pursue their concept of life, liberty, and happiness. I personally was not happy with the ruling; therefore the ruling restricted my pursuit of happiness. The 1973 Supreme Court ruling to allow the murder of unborn babies gave some women the ability to pursue their concept of life, liberty, and happiness. That same ruling insured that millions of unborn babies would never be able to pursue life let alone liberty and happiness. The Dred Scott Decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1850's allowed some slave owners to continue their pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. That same ruling prevented all slaves who sought freedom from obtaining that liberty. There are always some winners in the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness and some losers. It is impossible without GOD to allow all people to equally pursue life, liberty, and happiness because their concept of life, liberty, and happiness does not agree. What is life, liberty, and happiness to one is not to another.
The letter writer quoted the Declaration of Independence. He quoted, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...." Yet, he stopped short of quoting the entire sentence. The entire sentence reads, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." What! This very government document says that our rights come from our CREATOR--GOD. Wait! What about that wall separating church and state? If someone challenges the Declaration of Independence as a violation of the separate of church and state because it mentions a HIGHER BEING--GOD at least three times, would the U.S. Supreme Court declare that the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional? If the Court followed its own logic, it would. It would have to. How dare a government document mention GOD and violate the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness of some individuals. How absurd the U.S. Supreme Court has become because they ignore the U.S. Constitution and use their own judgments to determine right from wrong.
To be finished tomorrow, the LORD willing.
The letter to the editor begins by saying, "It is, of course, true that the U.S. Constitution does not contain the words 'wall of separation' between church and state." The next line of the letter begins with "However." Then the letter gives a noble philosophy stating "that one person may not interfere with another person's life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness." However, that goal as noble as it is; is impossible to achieve as long as man has not submitted to GOD'S will. The only way it could be possible is if every single person agrees on what is involved in life, liberty, and happiness and every single person agrees to honor the agreement. The very purpose of government is to restrict some people's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. Every government interferes with someone's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness to protect the majority. Every Constitution, every law, every rule, every regulation interferes with someone's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. If they did not, they would not be necessary!
If in my pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness I choose to murder someone who gets in my way or just because murdering someone makes me happy; the government has laws to punish me for committing murder. My liberty and happiness is restricted to give someone else the possibility of life. If in my pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness I choose to steal; government has laws to prevent me from stealing. If in my pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness I choose to drive 90 miles an hour; government has laws to restrict how fast I drive. The very purpose of all laws is to restrict some people's pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness for the good of society and, in some cases, to protect individuals from themselves.
There are, of course, thousands and thousands of examples. I will mention three and then a fourth using the source the author quoted. Recently a U.S. district court judge in California ruled that the phrase "under GOD" in the Pledge of Allegiance was in violation of the U.S. Constitution. That ruling gave some individuals the ability to more freely pursue their concept of life, liberty, and happiness. However, that same ruling restricted the freedom of others to pursue their concept of life, liberty, and happiness. I personally was not happy with the ruling; therefore the ruling restricted my pursuit of happiness. The 1973 Supreme Court ruling to allow the murder of unborn babies gave some women the ability to pursue their concept of life, liberty, and happiness. That same ruling insured that millions of unborn babies would never be able to pursue life let alone liberty and happiness. The Dred Scott Decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1850's allowed some slave owners to continue their pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. That same ruling prevented all slaves who sought freedom from obtaining that liberty. There are always some winners in the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness and some losers. It is impossible without GOD to allow all people to equally pursue life, liberty, and happiness because their concept of life, liberty, and happiness does not agree. What is life, liberty, and happiness to one is not to another.
The letter writer quoted the Declaration of Independence. He quoted, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...." Yet, he stopped short of quoting the entire sentence. The entire sentence reads, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." What! This very government document says that our rights come from our CREATOR--GOD. Wait! What about that wall separating church and state? If someone challenges the Declaration of Independence as a violation of the separate of church and state because it mentions a HIGHER BEING--GOD at least three times, would the U.S. Supreme Court declare that the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional? If the Court followed its own logic, it would. It would have to. How dare a government document mention GOD and violate the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness of some individuals. How absurd the U.S. Supreme Court has become because they ignore the U.S. Constitution and use their own judgments to determine right from wrong.
To be finished tomorrow, the LORD willing.
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 1:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home