"'Democracy:' It's a Threat to Our Republic"

An interesting column by David P. Shreiner in today's Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

.... How did we get this far -- from a republic to a democracy? It was a long process that began with the Civil War, which proved that states had no right to secede, that they did not have the powers guaranteed to them in the Bill of Rights. The 10th Amendment, ratified 70 years before the Civil War, states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Thus, the Civil War effectively canceled the 10th Amendment -- without a Constitutional Convention.

The perpetual confusion of Americans about their own government is aggravated by the old democratic habit of election of representatives of our former republic. It is one thing to elect leaders by majority vote, but quite another thing for majorities to decide what rights they have, to redistribute wealth and to restrict the liberties of minorities.

The rule of law and the Constitution have become irrelevant. We now live by poll results that are highly influenced by the socialist propaganda of the news media.

Do we have a right to a job? Yeah, you bet!

Do we have a right to go to college? Of course; isn't that in the Constitution?

Do we have a right to a parking place downtown? Yeah, why not!

Most Americans' abysmal knowledge of the Constitution allows those who desire world government to erode individual liberties, bit by bit, under the pretense of compassion, national security and equal rights for all.

Without a real Constitution there is no obstacle to giving up national sovereignty and adopting the new socialist world government.

Without a real Constitution we have no individual liberties.

Without a real Constitution the meaning of America is whatever the majority of the moment wants it to be.

And we are now without a real Constitution in the sense that it is no more than an historical document of no current value except when it suits someone's political agenda.

Liberals refer to it affectionately as a "living document," meaning that it changes as often as they want it to and it means whatever they want it to mean.

We live in a time when there are virtually no constitutional restraints on the federal government. The Constitution regularly is subverted by Congress, executive orders or judicial decrees....

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sun. 06/29/03 07:25:50 PM
Categorized as Political.

How SCOTUS Gets Things Exactly Backwards

George Neumayr explains it plainly, June 27, in The Spectator:

.... The framers [of the US federal constitution] didn't approach sodomy with the same level of awe as today's court. What the Kennedys and Souters call "liberty," the framers called "license," the abandonment to acts high in the catalogue of sin that spells the end of republics.

The majority on the Supreme Court declares that anti-sodomy laws compromise the "dignity" of homosexuals. The framers would reverse the judgment: it is sodomy that compromises their dignity, and it is the rule of law which points to and protects that dignity. The framers belonged to communities that passed such laws so as to safeguard a moral culture in which human dignity is possible.

The framers would say that the assault to dignity comes from a legal culture that sanctions sodomy, a culture that turns children over to homosexual couples, a culture that places homosexual relationships on the same level of sanctity as the traditional family.

The Supreme Court says anti-sodomy laws "demean" people. The framers thought those laws would discourage people from demeaning each other through the slavery of sin. It would befuddle the framers greatly to hear sodomy and dignity in the same sentence. They held that the dignity of democracy depended on citizens governing themselves according to moral standards, not according to a respect for each other's basest instincts. If citizens couldn't govern their own dark passions, how long would a democracy that relies on their capacity for self-government last? This concern made anti-sodomy laws eminently sensible to the framers....

(Thanks, Mark.)

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sun. 06/29/03 07:56:05 AM
Categorized as Social/Cultural.

Ss. Peter and Paul, Apostles

Today is the Solemnity of Ss. Peter and Paul. It is the 28th anniversary of the first time I attended Mass in prospect of becoming a Catholic, Sunday, June 29, 1975.

See Cathedra Sempiterna.

See also Prayers for the Church Unity Octave: In honor of Saints Peter and Paul.

And see Newman's The Christian Ministry and St. Paul's Conversion Viewed in Reference to His Office.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sun. 06/29/03 07:46:13 AM
Categorized as Religious.