In the recent national political spotlight have been the recurring
conflicts between those who would govern with a Christian Bible in one
hand and those who would prevent any religious activity whatsoever from
the activities, properties and conveniences of American public affairs.
One such item is the placement of a monument depicting an artist's conceptualization
of the pre-Christian Judaic "Ten Commandments" within the confines of a
county courthouse in one of the southern states. The second item of similar
prominence is the utterance, led by a person of authority in a government
controlled and mandated forum, of the "Pledge of Allegiance".
It is argued by opponents that such items are acts of people clothed
in the authority of government and are violating the 1st Amendment of the
Constitution for the United States of America, attempting an establishment
(verb) of religion under the color of law.
The proponents of the respective items argue that the same 1st Amendment
of the Constitution preserves their individual right to apply the property
and convenience of the People, represented by the government, in order
to acknowledge a "Superior Moral Foundation" for our government and to
induce the proper emotion of patriotism for the resulting Institutions
of American Government.
It is further argued that "God" exists and that a mandate to acknowledge
"God" is inherent and explicitly annunciated in the Founding documents
of
our state and federal governments.
"God", however, is a matter of Faith and is highly subjective and dependent
upon the opinion in the mind of each individual human. The Founders recognized
the duality of belief and faith coexistant with personal liberty and religious
expression. Regardless of their personal faith, they left religion out
of the Constitution and out of the hands of those who who rule the Federal
Government.
“Under God” is a recent amendment of the Pledge of Allegiance. The pledge
itself was conceived and published over a hundred years after our Revolution
against tyranny and more than one hundred years before today’s conflict
over the place of religious practice and government functions.
Patriotism and morality cannot be legislated. They are either present
or they are not. Morality and patriotism cannot be taught by government,
they are demonstrated by living example and adopted for their beneficial
qualities. The founders knew this fact and in their personal experience,
had cause to avoid granting any actual or presumption of authority for
governmental mandates of morality and faith in the new government. At the
same time, most, if not all of the Founders acknowledged the existence
of good” and “evil” and the necessity for common, fundamental agreement
on what constituted civilized personal conduct. The common statement of
agreement among the founders was the Bible, incorporating the unaccountable
authoritarian principles of the Old Testament and the tolerent, forgiving
principles of personal liberty and accountability of the New Testament.
The Right Wing has taken up advocacy of the severe form of unaccountable,
brutal and effective governing described repeatedly by the Old Testament
and has abandoned the tenets Christianity which command tolerance and privacy
of religious practice. The Left Wing has taken up the liberal tolerance
of the New Testament and abandoned the personal accountability aspect which
tempers license and moral abandonment.
The Right Wing of the American government and their supporters act as
if they believe that civilized behavior is voluntary only when an iron
fist of arrest, personal ruin, prosecution, fine, imprisonment and execution
are poised by government agents to strike against the offenders of their
concept of liberty.
The Left Wing of the American government and their supporters act as
if they believe that civilized behavior can be purchased with tolerance
and the theft and distribution of private property of those who do not
agree with their concept of liberty.
So long as the Left and the Right of our society are allowed to impose
their common tyranny upon our People in the guise of Irrational (Godly)
Authority or Unaccountable Humanism, our generations are doomed to mediocrity
of spirit, liberty and achievement.
The hypocricy and inherently malevolent underpinning of the argument
that “no-none is forced to pledge or to worship in a schoolroom or other
forum mandated or controlled by government agents demonstrates the foolish
and unsupportable quality of the demand for Oath and Prayer in the exercise
of governmental activities.
The United States of America was never and should never be a Christian”
nor a “Godless” organization. It is itself a dead non-entity, incapable
of either evil, good or indifferent conduct. The People’s beliefs and practices
are the soul of the government. When the people in government abandon the
assigned forms of governing and the People to not protest, it is moot whether
we have a moral, Godly, evil or dispassionate government, because the People
and the people who govern have become disconnected with principles of government
established when we destroyed the hold of our former government. It is
time to cast off the hold of the Right and Left who have seized our governing
process and are pruning the Tree of Liberty to a stunted and warped Bonsai
topiary.
Sheriffhenry Essays explore the processes, effects and consequences
of the ongoing revolution against the People's constitutional self-government
by elected representatives, officials and servants of our institutions.
In these essays, I allude to "We the People", state constitutions, the
federal constitution, the Federal US government and the State governments.
The common theme of my essays is to explain these terms and why the definitions
are critical to understanding individual loss of self-determination and
governing sovereignty in our country. The goal suggested by these essays
is the recovery of our individual liberty and inherent sovereignty.
Please visit again.
