Constitutional Emergency

When the founders struggled to find common ground for the basis and direction for this country, one thing was never in question. The main reason for declaring the King of England's lack of authority was his rebellion against the principles of government as expressed by the Bible. Because the King would not allow the colonists to worship as they saw fit, they deemed rebellion against him an act of worship. The main purpose, then, was to allow Americans to worship Jesus freely.
For example, one restriction of the power of the federal government was to keep one denomination of Christians from stuffing their form of worship upon anyone else worshiping Jesus.
Another is the second amendment. The freedom to bear arms is mainly so we can defend ourselves against the governments we elect.
Your thoughts?

Views: 45

Replies to This Discussion

I view some similarity between the King our forefathers battled and the battle brewing between American patriots today and King Obama.......Obama is an illegal resident of the White House...he like our forefathers nemesis, is beginning to violate the people, the Constitution, and Republic. Rebellion will occur, and it should occur when our Constitution is openly violated by a usurper of power...when the chief executive of America is unwilling to practice what he preaches and be "transparent" in his very credentials, there can be no doubt, something is rotten in Denmark.......

Will we stand for it? I think the answer is no.....but how long it will the situation go on is the question?
Well Col. I don't believe we have to go all the way to Denmark to find something rotten. I just read through all the PA group comments. Can't say I agree 100% but close enough. How do we know who to trust in this? I become over loaded with branching questions. At times I fear that even this list could be a source of our undoing. I did not spend 24 years in the sevice of my country 2 years in NAM to shrink from a fight for my flag. Stand and be counted, if their goal is to silence me dare they try I will not go easily.
I am in full agreement with the remarks by Col. Riley, and would only add that the writers of the Constitution believed, as I do, that the only authority that the Constitution has is the authority given it by the Bible, hence by Jesus.
"He has refused his assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public Good"
"He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing Importance..."
"He has refused to pass other Laws for the Accommodation of Large Districts of People"
"He has called together legislative Bodies at Places unusual, uncomfortable and distant from the Depository of their public Records"
"He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly..."
"He has refused for a long Time, after such Dissolutions, to cause others to be elected..."
"He has made judges dependent on his will Alone..."
"He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, STANDING ARMIES, without the consent of our Legislatures"
"He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power"
"In every stage of these Oppressions we have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble Terms; Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated Injury."

I think they had more cause and worries than just Jesus - just my thoughts.
Matt, and my fellow Pennsylvanian's, these are definately reasons listed for the Declaration of Independence, and most appropriate to include. And many men do not hold my view.
However, had we not received these rights from the divine source, they would have had no basis for recourse. These are but the list of symptoms in my view. The root cause, as suggested by the founding fathers, and as evidenced by other unrelated actions of the King, seems to have been the King's opinion that he was above the devine law as described in the Bible.
While it is popular to hold the Bible in contempt nowadays, I have found it consistant, with the same basic message in Genisis as is in the New Testament. The original struggle the founders had among themselves was that they believed that rulers are allowed to rule (or you might say ordained) by God, and to rebel under ordinary circumstance would be sin. The list or grievances you include was evidence, or legal argument, that circumstance was not normal. The Judge they were petitioning was the Heavenly Judge.
That said, perhaps I over state the importance of worship. In my view, true worship is reflected in, and part of, all of life. It is far more than what occurs in meetings two or three times a week. So in my view, the freedom to govern according to the well being of men is part of our necessary service to God Himself. I think you would find that most of the founding fathers held similar views.
Since the Magna Carta "rulers" were no longer held as divine appointees. Many THOUGHT they were but the Magna Carta established that no King is above the law he creates. This is where many of our Founders got the law of man to establish their just and noble cause.

We're starting, in several discussions, to incorporate Religion quite a bit and I suppose if my answers and replies are going to be much more in depth then a full explanation of where I'm coming from will be in order. However, for now, suffice to say that I do not hold the Christians, Jews, Hindus etc. etc. in contempt nor any of their related texts. I do not support all of them, the Talmud and the Koran being two great examples, but I do not hold contempt for them.

My point here, is that the 1st Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." That's pretty straightforward. The Congress, in a Constitutional Republic, is The People. So, continue logically, our 1st Amendment is saying that there will never be a requirement in our society regarding your religion. ACTIONS you take, sacrificing children - torturing chickens - whatever, are fair game but your peaceful and righteous practices that YOU feel bring you closer to God will never be subject to any popular controls. EVER.

"The main purpose, then, was to allow Americans to worship Jesus freely." - That's the statement I take contention with. The main purpose of the Declaration and the Constitution was to allow Free Men to live as Free Men - whatever that might entail. Jesus was not a requirement.
Obvoiusly I was not clear. Sorry. It was not a requirement to worship Jesus. That is one of the interesting features of worshiping Jesus. Because of the nature of Jesus, you can never be required to worship Him. You cannot be "Christian" by birth, because of your parents faith, by edict, nor any other method that does ont allow completely free will.
That part of the nature of believing Jesus is the very part that requires His followers to allow belief in anything. The limit, as you so clearly put it, is actions that contrary to the Bible may be judged and even punished if deemed necessary.
But my point was that though the State dare not force a religion, the nature of our Constitution depends upon our countrymen, in general, beleiving Jesus, including Him being who He said He is.
One of the most blatant evidences of this was the requirement in most schools to study the Bible. Further, several of the founders said as much in very pointed language.
Okay, I won't throw a bunch of quotes at you 'cause that'll mean you'll have to throw a bunch at me and we both pretty much know the ones we'll pick and we also know the ones that aren't valid or are proven false. So, let's go back to 1864 to Benjamin Morris in The Christian Life & Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States, this book has come into reprint lately and has given a rebirth to the "Christian Nation" argument. So, in the first chapter, Benjamin Morris gives us this:

""Christianity is the principle and all-pervading element, the deepest and most solid foundation, of all our civil institutions. It is the religion of the people,--the national religion; but we have neither an established church nor an established religion. An established church implies a connection between church and state, and the possession of civil and political as well as ecclesiastical and spiritual power of the former. Neither exist in this country; for the people have wisely judged that religion, as a general rule, is safer in their hands than in those of their rulers. In the United States there is no toleration; for all enjoy equality in religious freedom, not as a privilege granted, but as a right secured by the fundamental law of our social compact. Liberty of conscience and freedom of worship are not chartered immunities, but rights and duties founded on the constitutional republication of reason and revelation." (All emphasis from original text).

This Constitution we're fighting for is the protection for ALL men, those who believe in Jesus, Iehova, Yahweh, Allah, Vishnu, Annu or Obama - our Congress can make no law in regards in ANY religion. Correct?

Now, this horseshit that the 10 Commandments can't be outside a courthouse, a bible can't be on display in a government building. It's crap - plain and simple. A bible can be on display as can a torah, a Quran, even a Talmud which is one of the most vile documents ever written. So, yes, the "Separation of Church and State" fallacy in that context, I can go with you on.
Matt, I am not sure I agree with you in the same manner that you make your point. However:

The Constitution and founding papers make it very clear that establishment of a religion is to be left to the states. Each state was free to be Baptist, Quaker, etc.
That Right of the individual states has been usurped, like many other rights of the states, by power hungry Federal officials.

As to Muslim, etc., the Fathers did not expressly forbid it in the written code of law, but it is often expressed in related papers that should our country fail to rely on Jesus the Christ, we should not expect to long be free from tyranny.

Please do not misunderstand, I think the freedom you want to return to will be best supported by a people who basically trust Jesus. That does not mean you must trust Jesus. All men would enjoy the same freedom, not just the Christians. That includes the freedom to not be orthodox.
Thomas, what we're essentially discussing is History but I think we've taken up enough of the message board space on our own. I'm always interested in discussing history and the nature of this Nation with people, always something to learn and sometimes there's even something to teach. If you want to continue this discourse, feel free to send me a message through this system - if not, I suppose agree to disagree will have to be where it ends. Don't want to fill up the board with our personal discussions.
Thomas I am not sure that I want to turn this into a religious WAR but there is a point at which a line must be drawn to bring a halt to the corrupt downward slid this country is in. I do not believe that Obama has any religious intent, I truly believe he is for power and self. I read through hundreds of pages of Hitler's speaches at the recommendation of a person I respect. I then read through and studied speaches of Obama's the parallelisum is frightening. Then to be sure that all people with political ambition aren't of the same mind I read through speaches of other politically powerful. At some point the ones desiring power at all costs seem to run in the same lines. In each of these cases we are talking about folks who were leaving a trail of bodies in their wake on their climb up the ladder to the top. Once at top they seldom stay long before the common man or their own mind topples them. The CCCP took it for 80 years, how long will we take it before the uprising?
I am in agreement with LEB Sr, this web page will be used aginst us. Better to meet face to face, and then understand they will infiltrate. Paranoid? Better too careful. Discuss things here that are going public anyway. Demonstrations and the like.



Old Rooster created this Ning Network.

This effort is focused on sacrifice to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Fox News

Tech Notes

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11


1. Click on State Groups tab at the top of the page.
2. Find your State Flag
3. Click on Flag.
4. Look for link to join Your State Group near the top of the State Groups page.
5. Click on it.

Follow the Prompts

How to post "live" URL in posts at PFA............. Adding URLs in blog posts that are not "live" is a waste of everyone's time.....
Here's how....if anyone has better guidance send to me.....
First........type your text entry into the post block to include typing or paste the URL you want us to view........when finished with the text, highlight and copy the URL in the text.......then click the "add hyperlink" tool in the B, I, U box just above the text entry, after clicking, a window will open asking for the URL...paste the URL in the box and click "OK". You have now made the URL "live" shows some code before the post is published, it goes away when you "publish post".......


© 2020   Created by Old Rooster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service