The Power Necessary to Protect the Freedoms and Liberties of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Sep 21, 2009 at 14:14

Elsewhere we have written on the existential qualities of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America, and of the perception one might understand to be the present course of the American Administration in its endeavors to reinterpret the provisions contained therein. In the barely contained adulation of the September 17, 2009 response to this writer's May 28, 2008 observations, we have one of a considerable body of proponents that appear to be in collusion with the efforts of those who would redirect the course of American history. Similar adulation came from audiences around the world, such as in Egypt, where members of the audience there exclaimed 'we love you, Obama,' in complete concert with other similar expressions heard in the American Administration's world tour. The question is begged then, to what extent does the dissertation of the American documents of freedom and the framework of law that gave legal expression to that freedom have in common with an expression of adulation for someone who has dedicated his life to the process of altering those documents? Though an initial response may say 'nothing,' there is indeed a common thread, in the very expression of the freedom expressed in those documents. However there is a qualification.

The United States of America is unique in its place in history, from its initial concept, to the execution of the principles contained in those documents. In its development, the framers recognized the fragility of the legal system which they incorporated to govern an independent people, assembling articles of law loosely held together by an ideology recognizing the Divine providence of an Almighty Creator having ultimate power over the Creation, and further recognizing the catastrophic and devastating loss of the liberties defined by those articles so dearly held by forgetting Who was behind the formation of the United States of America. This question is begged then, if it was recognized by the framers of the founding documents that the most perfect way to govern this country is by continued recognition of its originating principles, why is there a feigned perception of a need for change?

The most diligent of the founding framers wrote in defense of the need for the people who were elected to serve to have those initial principles ingrained in the fabric of their character, or risk the loss of the liberties what would have been protected by like-minded individuals. Instead, it is found today that in false collusion with the detractors of the freedom of the liberties found in the forming documents, the very insidious methods of causing the collapse of the United States come, not from abroad, but from the misunderstanding and deceit perpetuated by those who educated the next generation to provide the uninitiated electorate necessary to eliminate those freedoms by expunging them along with the principles that gave them life.

The plea for an explanation of how could such a thing happen can only be answered by looking back and realizing that by eliminating the power by which the United States was formed (the Supreme Court decisions to eliminate Bible and prayer from the public domain), that of its Biblically principled initiation, the means to strip the liberties and freedoms were the price paid to allow other ideologies access and replacement in the way this country was governed. The final question becomes, how does one move the United States to the next (and final ) step away from its Christian roots and entertain the tenets of a contravening ideology (such as Islam)? Look around; see how it's already happening.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".