It’s getting harder and harder to decide which side of (BLANK) issues we should be supporting. On one hand there is a large, vocal, discordant, contingent clamoring for us to ignore the last 14 words of the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand there are a lot of “conservative Constitutionalists” calling on us to ignore 14 words in Article V of the same Constitution. Let’s just call the latter group the “Anti-Convention of States”(Antis) group.
What both groups fail to see or acknowledge is that the Founding Document, our Constitution, was and is a primary reason we have become the most successful and prosperous nation ever, on the face of the Earth. And for the most part, this was accomplished when this document was least amended and litigated. Accepting the first 10 Amendments, also known as The Bill of Rights, as part and parcel of our original founding, it can be stated that anything added or taken away from that original package has not been of the same quality as found in the original set of declarations and laws. Almost universally, those later-day additions or subtractions have resulted in the loss of liberty in one form or another for us.
Some examples: Ignoring the obligation for the Department of the Treasury to determine the value of our currency has resulted in continuous inflation and uncertainty. Our whole system of taxation is based on a need for this continuing escalation of prices and wages. The Federal Reserve is the backbone of this fiscal tyranny. The litigious determination of the meaning of certain clauses within the Constitution has caused us the loss of many of our inherited freedoms, i.e. the incredible stretching of the meaning of the original regulation in the Inter State Commerce Clause. The General Welfare Clause changed from the States’ welfare to the individual, and the grotesque twisting of Promotion of the Arts that now bring us “Christ in Urine,” as an example of this distortion.
A more scholarly enumeration of the results would require several additional pages of examples and links, but I hope you’re getting the picture that bad “stuff” (a la noted Constitutional scholar Jennifer, “Hunger Games,” Lawrence) generally happens when we add-to or take-from our original Founding Documents.
So, getting back to the competing groups for the destruction of the Republic; The gun-grabbers say, “Let’s completely ignore the last 14 words of the second Amendment.” This is facilitated by the almost universal dismissing of the first 13 words of the same Amendment, re: Edwin Viera, but that’s a different subject for another day. The Antis vociferously attack any attempt to infringe on our right to bears arms. But then they turn right around and say we should ignore 14 words in Article V: or, on the application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call for a Convention for proposing Amendments.… The desire of both groups is the removal of vital parts of our Constitution, which unfortunately aids and abets the aims of the Globalist, foreign and domestic. An unarmed populace is the number one requirement for imposing domination upon an unwilling populace. Removal of the selected 14 words from Article V is just another chipping-away of State’s Rights, which have been almost completely eliminated from the political arena. Just a casual perusal of the Articles of Confederation and their discussion in our only Constitutional Convention gives us the original sense of States’ sovereignty and its dominance in our original Founding. That early balance and tension between State sovereignty and National sovereignty created a dynamic that successfully guided our political ship of state for many of its formative years. That tension is almost nonexistent today, with the lopsided growth of the Federal bureaucracy and the foolish surrender of States rights, such as the 17th Amendment.
Both the gun-grabbers and Antis rely on the same apathy and laziness of the electorate to present their “arguments” in favor of their viewpoints. We’re all familiar with the ridiculous, “the 2nd Amendment was for duck hunters;” and it gets more ludicrous from there. The Antis always lead with, “it was a runaway Convention,” since they were only tasked to amend the Articles of Confederation. The unstated logical conclusion is that OUR current Constitution is illegitimate?
This is not to imply that the 1787 Constitution is “illegal” or that the American government today lacks legitimacy. To the contrary, the states have always held complete sovereignty — in the words of the Declaration of Independence — “to alter or abolish” government at a convention, whether that convention is the Continental Congress in 1776, the 1787 Philadelphia Convention, or one convened under Article V of the U.S. Constitution today.
One argument against a Convention of States uses a premise that flies in the face of the intent of the 14 included words, namely that the delegates to such a Convention would be politicians. The very reason those 14 words were placed in Article V was to insure politicians were specifically excluded from the process. This process is a great place for the States to start reclaiming the rights that have been taken by the big bully on the block, the Federal Government. It’s not hard to imagine a modern digital form of The Federalist Papers being created to promulgate the presentation of such Amendments that should arise from this process. But the big question remains, will America awake from its lethargy enough to give this process the backing it needs to get this nation back on a legitimate track to greatness? You are part of the answer.