Declaration of Independence, Constitution & Bill of Rights

Declaration of Independence


Moses (c. 1300's B.C.)-Prophet & Judge of the Israelites-with two Tablets on the East Face of the United States Supreme Court Building	Ten Commandements on front bronze doors of the United States Supreme Court building

19th century sculpture of Lady Justice with no blindfold and book in the Czech Republic. [The Swiss Reformers symbolized Lady Justice with no blindfold and her sword pointing to the open Bible at her feet--the Reformers believed Revealed law(sola scriptura)is the only way for a nation to have moral laws.] Natural (ie. secular) law was a fraud-the pageans always had a blindfolded Lady Justice	United States Supreme Court

What is the correct way to interpret the Constitution?

The Founders' Biblical philosophy remained the unquestioned standard for law and government until the turn of the 20th century. A different philosophy started to emerge in the mid-twentieth century among judges and educators, which was rejected by the founding fathers. This different philosophy was often termed "relativism" or "pragmatism" that means there are no absolute standards and man is the measure of all things (what is right or wrong)--it is also called "secular humanism". When the "progressives" apply this to law, they call it "legal positivism"--it is another word for "relativism". (Legal positivism was developed by Dean Christopher Columbus Langell of Harvard in the 1870's and followed by Dean Roscoe Pound, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., and others, has been the predominant philosophy taught in law schools during the 1990's.) John Eidsmoe--a retired Lt. Colonel in the Air Force, Constitutional scholar and law professor--summarizes "legal positivism" as follows:

1. There are no objective, God-given standards of law, or if there are, they are irrelevant to the modern legal system.

2. Since God is not the author of law, the author of law must be man; in other words, law is law simply because the highest human authority, the state, has said it is law and is able to back it up by force.

3. Since man and society evolve, therefore law must evolve as well.

4. Judges, through their decisions, guide the evolution of law (Note again: Judges "make law").

5. To study law, get at the original sources of law, the decisions of judges; hence most law schools today use the "case law" method of teaching law.

There is even a movement worse than the one mentioned above called "legal realists". They openly admit using the legal system to promote their own ends/agenda--the Critical Legal Studies movement is one aspect of "legal realism".

The Constitution is suppose to be interpreted, judged--according the founding fathers--only against the specific, self-evident wording of the Constitution, that is the original intent. Alexander Hamilton (01/11/1755 -07/12/1804) one of the Founding fathers and 1st United States Secretary of the Treasury stated the following in Federalist #81 about how to interpret the Constitution:

There is not a syllable in the plan [the Constitution] which directly empowers the national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of the Constitution. (emphasis added).

James Kent (1763 - 1847) an American jurist, legal scholar and Chief Justice of the New York State Supreme Court also explained that the Judiciary compare a law only to "the true intent and meaning of the Constitution".

Constitutionalism 101 --PDF
How to decipher the Constitution--PDF
Lord Mockton, Copenhagin and the Constitution (Treaties cannot override the Constitution)—PDF
The Feminist Movement Has Caused the Undermining of Due Process for Men--PDF
Lawmakers in 35 States move to reclaim sovereignty under 10th Amendment provision
Fully Informed Jury Association - see their media catalog
Handbook for Juries
Caught. Net - Jurors’ Handbook
Sherrif Mack - the Constitutional Authority of the Sheriff’s Office.
Supreme Court of the United States - look up documents.

What about Darwinism’s influence on law?

If the theory of evolution is adopted over creation by God, the human law is not longer subject to God. To quote Dr. Augusto Zimmerman (Brazilian-born and an internationally known legal scholar who teaches at Western Australia’s Murdoch University):

As a result of Darwinism, many lawyers embraced the doctrine of legal positivism and interpreted law as a mere result of sheer force and social struggle. Consequently, law was reduced to a mere managerial skill used in the service of social engineering, which is the dominant view in the legal profession today…

Dr. Augusto further explains,

Many judges believe that their countries’ constitutions should be interpreted as if they were “living documents”, instead of being understood according to their original meaning. This apparently ‘progressive” view of law regards the constitution of liberal democracies such as Australia and the United States as old-fashioned document that should be regularly “revised” and “updated”, according to the “enlightened” decisions of a few unelected judges. So the “rule of law” is replaced by the “rule of judges”.

What were some of the arguments used by early advocates of a “living constitution”?

Pro-slavery leader Alexander H. Stephens (1812 – 1883), who was a barrister from Georgia and Vice-President of the Confederate States, describes pro-slavery Confederation as a “progressive society”.
Nazis legal theorists stated that the legal system should not be based on fixed rules of law but evolve in a continuous flow as a “living law—they were very progressive and acting on “evolutionary science”.
After Hitler’s Third Reich, many legal theorists argued that the Nazi laws were valid under legal positivism.1

1Sarfati, J, Law and Creation, Creation, pgs. 16-17,vol. 31, No. 2, March-May 2009 < http://creation.com >

Should Natural Rights/Natural Law in the Legal profession be rejected even if they were included in the Declaration of Independence?

Yes, according to Dr. Robert A. Morey (world renowned philosopher and theologian) natural law has caused great harm to Western civilization, especially the United States. Dr. Morey states the following about “natural rights” and “natural law” in Colonial America from his book entitled The Bible, Natural Law, and Natural Theology: Conflict or Compromise?, Chapter 11, Pages 19 & 20 < http://faithdefenders.com >

Colonial America

This exposes the ugly side of Colonial America. We have conveniently forgotten that the “natural rights” found in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights and other documents from that period did not extend to women, children, slaves or Native Americans. Not even all white males had these rights. Only land holders were allowed to vote!

When modern Natural theologians pine for the “good old days” of Colonial America, I cringe. It means the suppression of women and the enslavement of non-whites. It means slave ships, whips, shackles, auction blocks, raping of women, selling of children, forced labor, torture, and other horrors. No, they were not the “good old days.” The historical reality is that Natural Law did not give natural rights to all people. It always fought against extending rights to all people.

The Abolitionist Preachers

It took preachers with a Bible in one hand and a gun in the other to abolish slavery and to extend rights to all people regardless of race or creed. The leaven of Scripture finally worked its way through society and brought an end to slavery. The Civil War was not the beginning, but the end of that process.

There was one American church denomination that was always opposed to slavery. Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906) commented in one of her fiery speeches, The Scotch Covenanters or Reformed Presbyterians is the only evangelical church in all the nominally free states of the North that can consistently claim freedom from all sanction of, or compromise with slavery, “the sum of all villainies.” The Old Scotch Covenanters refuse church fellowship not only to slave-holders, but to churches that fellowship slave-holders.

To read the Constitution & Bill of Rights, click the G. Gordon Liddy website: http://www.liddyshow.com/constitution.php

Renew America, click link for Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, Federalist Papers, Anti-Federalist Papers, Communist Manifesto, etc. http://www.renewamerica.com/documents_menu.htm

For more information on the Constitution click the side bar "History Sites" .

Note: This is why it is important to appoint "Strict Constructionist" judges.