"Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well-wisher to his posterity swear by the blood of the Revolution never to violate in the least particular the laws of the country, and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and laws let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor - let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the charter of his own and his children's liberty. Let reverence for the laws be breathed by every American mother to the lisping babe that prattles on her lap; let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let it be written in primers, spelling-books, and in almanacs; let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short, let it become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay of all sexes and tongues and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its altars."
Until well into my life-time, the overwhelming majority of Americans believed that the United States was a Christian nation. In believing that, they did not desire the persecution of other religions, nor did they want to see people forced to become Christians, nor did they believe that one Christian denomination should be favored at the expense of others. They rejected the concept of one Christian denomination functioning as an established national Church, as the Churches of England and Scotland still do today in Great Britain.
But Americans overwhelmingly believed that Christian ideas and principles should receive favorable treatment and that its understanding of Moral Law should undergird the laws of the United States and the individual states. When other people’s religious practices came into conflict with Moral Law, Moral Law, not the practices of other religions, was always supreme. People were free to believe as they saw fit, but they could not practice their beliefs when those practices ran contrary to morality; they had to live by the Christian based laws of the United States. This can readily be seen through the decisions of the United States Supreme Court. As one example of how this has been worked out, one may note Davis v. Beason cited below, where Mormons were forbidden to practice polygamy, an early tenet of their faith, because it was contrary to Moral Law as understood by historic Christianity.Pasted from <http://rbvincent.com/usconstitution.htm>
Mark Levin: Using the Constitution to Save It
Guest Author June 23, 2014
Mark Levin sat down with TheBlaze last week to discuss the need for a Convention of States to preserve liberty in America. We’ve posted an excerpt from the interview below, and you can access the full article by subscribing to TheBlaze Magazine here.
Constitutional attorney Michael Farris gives the survival of American liberty “10 years, at the most.”
Conservative radio host, lawyer and author Mark Levin says, “America is reaching the point of no return, unraveling quickly over the last 10 years.” He’s not predicting a second American civil war between statists and constitutional individualists, but he says that he “fears what is possible down the road” if federal powers continue sucking liberty from states and individuals, unchecked by either political party.
Conservative columnist George Will joins the chorus, recently predicting, “I am quite confident that we’re going to rebel against this abusive government.”
But while there’s consensus on the threat, there is not unanimity among conservatives for triggering a constitutional amendment provision that’s never been used in the history of the United States—a convention of states.
Article V provides two ways to amend the U.S. Constitution. In one, a proposed amendment is initiated and passed by Congress, then sent to the states for ratification. All 27 current amendments followed that path.
But to counter a power-grabbing federal government, the Founders alternatively provided that a common resolution by two-thirds of the states would require Congress to call a convention where state-appointed delegates could initiate constitutional amendments.
Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum argues a convention of states could open a constitutional Pandora’s box, unleashing a “runaway,” liberal trashing of the Constitution that sacrifices more individual rights and state powers to an all-powerful central government.
But Levin believes the method the Founders’ provided for states to exercise their constitutional muscle over what he argues has become a federal leviathan is the answer to resetting unbalanced federal power.
Levin’s latest book, “The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic,” lays out his case for a convention of states and proposes 11 new amendments, including congressional and Supreme Court term limits, changing the way U.S. senators are selected, debt and taxation limits, checks on bureaucracy and regulations, a method to override Supreme Court decisions, refining Congress’ Commerce Clause powers and setting national voter identification standards.
In an interview with TheBlaze, Levin acknowledged his original reticence to tinkering with America’s 225-year-old framework. But as federal power has metastasized, Levin believes the Founders supplied a solution if America is prepared for bold action to reclaim liberty.
“The Framers anticipated this day might arrive, for they knew that republics deteriorate at first from within,” Levin says in his book. “They provided a lawful and civil way to repair what has transpired. We, the people, through our state legislatures—and the state legislatures, acting collectively—have enormous power to constrain the federal government, reestablish self-government and secure individual sovereignty.”
Levin warns that states acting to reclaim individual and states’ rights will face vigorous challenges from a bloated and intractable federal ruling class.
“The Statists’ utopia and the Framers’ Constitution cannot coexist,” Levin says. “The Left will fight this approach because they get what they want with this top-down approach. They fear bottom-up government.”
Levin says the clock is ticking in a race America must not lose.
Isn't it interesting that people stray from the Constitution and run back to it here and there when it suits their purposes, rather than revering it as the civil standard of our nation? It is much the same way with God and his word, that people do the same thing with it. In the day you pick of the fruit of good and evil (decide for yourselves what is good or expedient at the moment), you will surely die. This applies to individuals and nations.
Everyone who takes an oath to the Constitution of the United States must consider it their highest oath under God. Anyone who has taken an oath to any other person than Jehovah God must be considered in violation of their Constitutional Oath. The following contains a video that illustrates the full extent of the infiltration in our society starting with education and expanding into every area of life like a cancer.
Jesus: "Every American has a constitutional duty to protect the Constitution itself and no greater example exists than the series of amendments that were fraudulently "ratified" in the years of Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. If citizens do not watchdog their government then these are the kinds of abuses that take place. This one amendment has caused untold misery in America and has nearly cost this country her life and the demise of freedom would be a result."
HOW SOME STATES DID NOT LEGALLY RATIFY THE 16TH AMENDMENT
Bill Benson's findings, published in "The Law That Never Was," make a convincing case that the 16th amendment was not legally ratified and that Secretary of State Philander Knox was not merely in error, but committed fraud when he declared it ratified in February 1913. What follows is a summary of some of the major findings for many of the states, showing that their ratifications were not legal and should not have been counted.
The 16th amendment had been sent out in 1909 to the state governors for ratification by the state legislatures after having been passed by Congress. There were 48 states at that time, and three-fourths, or 36, of them were required to give their approval in order for it to be ratified. The process took almost the whole term of the Taft administration, from 1909 to 1913.
Knox had received responses from 42 states when he declared the 16th amendment ratified on February 25, 1913, just a few days before leaving office to make way for the administration of Woodrow Wilson. Knox acknowledged that four of those states (Utah, Conn, R.I. and N.H.) had rejected it, and he counted 38 states as having approved it. We will now examine some of the key evidence Bill Benson found regarding the approval of the amendment in many of those states.
In Kentucky, the legislature acted on the amendment without even having received it from the governor (the governor of each state was to transmit the proposed amendment to the state legislature). The version of the amendment that the Kentucky legislature made up and acted upon omitted the words "on income" from the text, so they weren't even voting on an income tax! When they straightened that out (with the help of the governor), the Kentucky senate rejected the amendment. Yet Philander Knox counted Kentucky as approving it!
In Oklahoma, the legislature changed the wording of the amendment so that its meaning was virtually the opposite of what was intended by Congress, and this was the version they sent back to Knox. Yet Knox counted Oklahoma as approving it, despite a memo from his chief legal counsel, Reuben Clark, that states were not allowed to change it in any way.
Attorneys who have studied the subject have agreed that Kentucky and Oklahoma should not have been counted as approvals by Philander Knox, and, moreover, if any state could be shown to have violated its own state constitution or laws in its approval process, then that state's approval would have to be thrown out. That gets us past the "presumptive conclusion" argument, which says that the actions of an executive official cannot be judged by a court, and admits that Knox could be wrong.
If we subtract Kentucky and Oklahoma from the 38 approvals above, the count of valid approvals falls to 36, the exact number needed for ratification. If any more states can be shown to have had invalid approvals, the 16th amendment must be regarded as null and void.
The state constitution of Tennessee prohibited the state legislature from acting on any proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution sent by Congress until after the next election of state legislators. The intent, of course, is to give the proposed amendment a chance to become an issue in the state legislative elections so that the people can have a voice in determining the outcome. It also provides a cooling off period to reduce the tendency to approve an idea just because it happens to be the moment's trend. You've probably already guessed that the Tennessee legislature did not hold off on voting for the amendment until after the next election, and you'd be right - they didn't; hence, they acted upon it illegally before they were authorized to do so. They also violated their own state constitution by failing to read the resolution on three different days as prescribed by Article II, Section 18. These state constitutional violations make their approval of the amendment null and void. Their approval is and was invalid, and it brings the number of approving states down to 35, one less than required for ratification.
Texas and Louisiana violated provisions in their state constitutions prohibiting the legislatures from empowering the federal government with any additional taxing authority. Now the number is down to 33.
Twelve other states, besides Tennessee, violated provisions in their constitutions requiring that a bill be read on three different days before voting on it. This is not a trivial requirement. It allows for a cooling off period; it enables members who may be absent one day to be present on another; it allows for a better familiarity with, and understanding of, the measure under consideration, since some members may not always read a bill or resolution before voting on it (believe it or not!). States violating this procedure were: Mississippi, Ohio, Arkansas, Minnesota, New Mexico, West Virginia, Indiana, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Colorado, and Illinois. Now the number is reduced to 21 states legally ratifying the amendment.
When Secretary Knox transmitted the proposed amendment to the states, official certified and sealed copies were sent. Likewise, when state results were returned to Knox, it was required that the documents, including the resolution that was actually approved, be properly certified, signed, and sealed by the appropriate official(s). This is no more than any ordinary citizen has to do in filing any legal document, so that it's authenticity is assured; otherwise it is not acceptable and is meaningless. How much more important it is to authenticate a constitutional amendment! Yet a number of states did not do this, returning uncertified, unsigned, and/or unsealed copies, and did not rectify their negligence even after being reminded and warned by Knox. The most egregious offenders were Ohio, California, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Minnesota - which did not send any copy at all, so Knox could not have known what they even voted on! Since four of these states were already disqualified above, California is now subtracted from the list of valid approvals, reducing it to 20.
These last five states, along with Kentucky and Oklahoma, have particularly strong implications with regard to the fraud charge against Knox, in that he cannot be excused for not knowing they shouldn't have been counted. Why was he in such a hurry? Why did he not demand that they send proper documentation? They never did.
Further review would make the list dwindle down much more, but with the number down to 20, sixteen fewer than required, this is a suitable place to rest, without getting into the matter of several states whose constitutions limited the taxing authority of their legislatures, which could not give to the federal govern authority they did not have.
The results from the
six states Knox had not heard from at the time he made his proclamation do not
affect the conclusion that the amendment was not legally ratified. Of those
six: two (Virginia and Pennsylvania) he never did hear from, because they ignored
the proposed amendment; Florida rejected it; two others (Vermont and
Massachusetts) had rejected it much earlier by recorded votes, but, strangely,
submitted to the Secretary within a few days of his ratification proclamation
that they had passed it (without recorded votes); West Virginia had purportedly
approved it at the end of January 1913, but its notification had not yet been
received (remember that West Virginia had violated its own constitution, as