Second-Rate Second Amendment

The people of the United States have allowed their Constitution to be, for all intents and purposes, rewritten.  This document, along with the Declaration of Independence, outlines our form of government as well as reiterates the rights given to man by his Creator.  As its preamble states, it was ordained and established to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.  The Constitution is plain and easy to understand, but has basically been disregarded and dismantled to the point that now its application is a far cry from what it actually conveys.  Our now second-rate Second Amendment is one example.

The Second Amendment declares, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”  This has come to mean that a free state is not that important, the people can be told who can keep and bear arms, how many and what kind of arms they can keep, and when and where they can bear them.  The part about “shall not be infringed” has been thrown out the window.  The keeping and bearing of arms is to provide “the security of a free state”, and since every citizen is part of a “state”, this means the security of the individual and the state.  The keeping and bearing of arms has come to be thought by many to be a danger to security.  “Gun free zones”, or at least gun limited zones (these can be called “infringement zones”), have been established in schools, churches, and other places, as if this will keep dangerous criminals from using guns in these areas.  It doesn’t take a genius to realize that if someone or some group wants to kill or harm people, they will likely choose a place where they will receive little to no resistance, such as in an “infringement zone”.

Sadly, there are those who claim to advocate the Second Amendment while opposing the intention of it to allow all the right to protect themselves.  Even Jesus told his disciples to arm themselves, and didn’t tell them to get a permit first:  “…if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” (Luke 22:36)  Evidently, Jesus endorsed the right to keep and bear arms.  Indeed, this right along with others was given to us by Jesus.  The Declaration of Independence makes this clear when stating that we are endowed by our Creator with the right to life and liberty.  Since we have been given these rights we have the right to defend them.  Nowhere in the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, or the Constitution does it allow for a law abiding citizen that has his mental faculties to be made defenseless at any time.  According to the Second Amendment, it is unlawful to require that a person be unarmed when entering a public place such as a courthouse, a schoolhouse, or a church house.  This is forcing a person to depend on others for his defense, or depend on there being no one who breaks the unarmed rule and causes harm.

If a person is proven unfit to “bear arms”, then that right should be taken away or limited (infringed), but infringement before being proven unfit is being assumed guilty before proven innocent.  Many if not all of the shootings that have occurred in “infringement zones” could have been mitigated or eliminated had the right to keep and bear arms not have been infringed.  Instead of avoiding guns, the purpose of guns and gun safety should be taught at home, in the schools, and in the church.  Before our government officials steered our country away from Christianity, there wasn’t much need to remain armed at all times, but until we return to that way of life, it is necessary.  A second-rate Second Amendment provides second-rate security.

 

Read the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, the U. S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights

To read the Bible click here:

https://www.biblegateway.com/

To read the Declaration of Independence click here:

https://wallbuilders.com/the-declaration-of-independence/

To read the U. S. Constitution, click here:

https://wallbuilders.com/constitution-united-states-america/

http://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bill-of-rights/

http://lp.hillsdale.edu/constitution-101-signup-3-ppc/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=con101&appeal_code=MK617PP1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIqaKO46mE2AIV24qzCh3Xkgr4EAAYASAAEgI3b_D_BwE

 

 

A Lawless America

America is becoming a lawless land.  The downward spiral began at the top, as it always does, with the leadership of government and the human leadership in the church.  This descent began many years ago in subtle, deceptive ways.  The Federal Reserve was established; the tax code was changed to prevent non-profit organizations from being involved politically, so pastors and churches would keep silent for fear of man and fear of lost revenue; official prayers in public schools were outlawed; the war on poverty was declared; the dismemberment and murder of unborn babies was permitted; the Ten Commandments were outlawed in public schools; and in defiance of logic, same sex “marriage” is now promoted.

The Lord Jesus Christ established laws in the beginning (John 1:1-3).  He has set the standards on which America and other lands have based their laws.  Our trouble began when we turned away from God’s laws which are found in the scriptures of the Holy Bible, and when we turned away from the Constitution which is based on those same scriptures.  We are witnessing the results in the chaos and the crime that is manifesting across the country.

The establishment of the Federal Reserve marked one of the first major steps away from the rule of law toward the rule of lawlessness.  Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution authorizes Congress to coin money and regulate the value thereof.  With an unlawful act, Congress ceded this power away from itself to a private group known as the Federal Reserve.  What reason could there be, other than a lust for more riches and power, for a group of men who weren’t satisfied with the wealth that they already possessed, to seek control of the people’s wealth?  God tells us in 1Timothy 6:9-10, “But those who want to be rich fall into temptation, a trap, and many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge people into ruin and destruction.  For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and by craving it, some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pains.”  The Federal Reserve has plunged many into ruin, destruction, and untold negative consequences for generations.

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy–Pori1NL6fKm2SnY/The%20Creature%20From%20Jekyll%20Island_djvu.txt

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was supposed to give stability to America’s economy.  However, only 16 years later on October 29, 1929, the Great Depression began affecting not only the United States, but also the world.  The depression continued into the 1940s, revealing to no avail the fallacy of the Federal Reserve and its feigned attempts to be an economic stabilizer.  By tampering with a natural market that can only correct itself through supply and demand, Congress and the Federal Reserve cabal proliferated poverty throughout the republic and the world.  Then the “progressives” did what they commonly do.  Instead of trashing the idea of a central banking system which obviously destabilized, or rather wrecked the economy, they offered solutions to the crises that they created.  With the nation desperate for relief, whatever hope offered was accepted.

The Franklin Roosevelt administration and other progressives offered an answer to the self-inflicted crises: the “New Deal” plan.  Under this plan, Congress allowed funding for the creation and operation of largely autonomous government agencies such as the Social Security Administration, the Federal Housing Administration, the Farm Credit Administration, the Works Progress Administration, and many others.  The New Deal greatly expanded the reach and power of the federal government, usurped state authority, and is still unconstitutionally taking vast amounts of the money of Americans.  Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution covers the limit of authority of the federal government, and these agencies do not fall within this limit.

https://www.britannica.com/list/7-alphabet-soup-agencies-that-stuck-around

http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=36438

Typical of liberals, or progressives, it is never enough.  In 1964 President Lyndon Johnson announced the “Great Society” and the “War on Poverty”, which led to even more unconstitutional spending of Americans’ money in addition to the cost of the New Deal.  Johnson and Congress bypassed the Constitution and usurped state authority by funneling tax dollars into such unauthorized areas as food stamps, schools, and Social Security.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/a-not-so-great-society/article/2001972

Ten years before the declaration of war on poverty, Johnson and Congress smoothed the path before them by curtailing opposition from large segments of the population that would be most likely to balk at their usurpation of power.  The Johnson Amendment declared that tax exempt organizations such as churches could no longer endorse candidates for government office and remain tax exempt.  Church pastors and ministers spend much time studying and reflecting on issues relevant to the well-being of their congregations.  Therefore this threat of lost revenue has ever since, to a great extent, closed off information to a vast number of common sense voters who would otherwise be more informed on important matters affecting their lives and the lives of generations to come.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/24030-trump-repeal-johnson-amendment-that-muzzles-pastors

In 1962, two years before Johnson’s “Great Society” and “War on Poverty”, the Supreme Court led the nation in a rejection of God’s future blessings upon it in the Engel v. Vitale case.  In it, the court ruled that a simple prayer that acknowledged dependence upon almighty God and asked for His blessings was not to be promoted by public schools.  America’s founding document, the Declaration of Independence, acknowledges the Creator and that our rights come from Him, yet the Court ruled that He won’t be prayed to in our schools in any sanctioned fashion.  This is an obvious disconnect between the Court and the country’s foundation.  For that matter, the disconnect runs through all three branches of our government in their erroneous interpretation of the religious clause of the First Amendment.  If the whole counsel of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and writings of the Founders are taken, this clause obviously means to keep the government out of the church and applies only to Christianity.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Engel-v-Vitale

According to the Declaration of Independence, one of the reasons governments are instituted is to protect life.  In the Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade in 1973, the most innocent and defenseless sector of the public lost this protection.  Since the ruling in this case, our nation is responsible for an estimated amount of over 50 million infant deaths, and that number continues to grow while the criminals with the reins of government are allowed to keep their hold.

http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=25685

http://liveactionnews.org/new-video-debunks-planned-parenthoods-3-percent-abortion-myth/

God’s ten basic rules to maintain societal and individual well-being were outlawed by the Supreme Court in 1980, accelerating lawlessness through elimination of any standard of right and wrong.  In Stone v. Graham, one point of argument for the majority was that the effect of posting copies of the Ten Commandments would “be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey, the Commandments.”  The numerous accounts of school shootings, illicit teacher/student relationships, discipline problems, sub-par education and poor grades since the law “experts” overruled God are confirmation of the value of the Ten Commandments in teaching right from wrong.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/449/39

The wealth of the people is taken from them in excess taxes and is wasted in many unconstitutional ways: In 2008 George W. Bush and Congress illegally spent nearly a trillion of the citizens’ dollars to save financial institutions from failure.  In 2009 Congress and Barack Obama unlawfully spent nearly a trillion dollars of American’s money to supposedly stimulate the economy.  In 2010 Obama and Congress took over the nation’s health care by passing the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).  The cost of this unlawful act is incalculable due to subsidies, varied premium increases, and other related costs affecting Americans.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26987291/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/bush-signs-billion-financial-bailout-bill/#.WDB4vfkrLIV

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/obamas-stimulus-documented-failure

http://libertytalk.fm/twila-brace-the-wedge-of-health-freedom/

Since the Federal Reserve, the New Deal, the Johnson Amendment, Engel v. Vitale, the War on Poverty, Roe v. Wade, and Stone v. Graham, the Constitution has become an optional guideline to liberals and many supposedly conservatives.  They usually only refer to it when it is needed to promote an agenda, and then often out of context.  For instance, freedom of speech as in the First Amendment is repeatedly cited to condone behavior such as the production of pornography, which is not speech at all, but is an activity that is extremely damaging to society; and the order to the president in Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution to faithfully execute the laws has been disobeyed by him in many ways, including failing to enforce immigration laws and marriage laws.  However, behavior that is in keeping with the Constitution but is contrary to the agenda of the liberal left is regarded by them as unacceptable and wrongly judged by them as unconstitutional.  Examples include the arrest of a clerk that refused to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple, and fines levied against others that declined to participate in same sex “weddings”; other examples include preventing states from enforcing immigration laws, and the impeding of states’ attempts to prevent voter fraud.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-administration-will-no-longer-defend-doma/

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/06/obamas-policy-strategy-ignore-laws-077486

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/25/politics/immigration-administration-reaction/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/defiant-kentucky-clerk-could-be-found-in-contempt-thursday/2015/09/03/34e50f08-51af-11e5-9812-92d5948a40f8_story.html

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/03/15/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-embattled-71-year-old-christian-florist-who-refused-to-make-gay-wedding-arrangements/

http://www.afajournal.org/past-issues/2015/july-august/american-dream-turns-to-nightmare-for-couple/

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/368234/voter-fraud-weve-got-proof-its-easy-john-fund

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party_voter_intimidation_case

The Obama administration, Congress, and the Supreme Court have taken disregard of the Constitution to a whole new level: the passage of Obamacare; the passage of budgets that fund Planned Parenthood, an organization that has been proven to kill babies and sell their body parts; the allowance of millions of illegal aliens to come into and remain in the country; the placement of economy destroying restrictions on businesses within the energy sector and businesses in general; the allowance of homosexual “marriage”; the allowance of homosexuals and transvestites in the military; the forcing of the acceptance of homosexual behavior; the allowance of anyone to use the public bathroom, shower, or changing room of their choice, regardless of their sex; and the allowance of adherents to Islam, that are known to be enemies of the United States, to enter and remain in the country unchecked.  These are only a few of the unlawful acts of the federal government.

http://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/cmp/investigative-footage/

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/18554-obama-opens-borders-releases-illegal-immigrants-into-u-s

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/05/14/immigration-releases-convicted-felons/9090557/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/15/121-murders-attributed-illegal-immigrants-released/

http://abcnews.go.com/US/san-francisco-woman-shot-killed-strolling-pier-father/story?id=32210463

http://www.frc.org/op-eds/the-energy-deniers

http://www.afa.net/the-stand/news/2016/07/transgenders-in-military-impeachable-damaging-and-expensive/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/obama-appoints-eric-fanning-as-first-openly-gay-u-s-army-secretary-1442613600

http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/judge-blocks-obamas-transgenders-schools-mandate/

http://www.christianpost.com/news/obama-admin-accepting-only-28-christians-vs-5435-muslim-refugees-despite-isis-genocide-of-believers-165204/

The unlawfulness that began with ignoring the Constitution through the establishment of the Federal Reserve, taking power from the people by giving control of their money and therefore control of the country to a few individuals with designs for the country contrary to God and the Constitution, has now spread like an epidemic through the land.  It is manifesting in cities with people rioting simply because of the enforcement of law.  Those at the highest levels of government and their loyal media incite these riots, calling them protests, which are based on false assumptions of racism, and proclaim erroneous information in an attempt to justify the actions of the rioters.  Unlawfulness leads to chaos.

More rights will fall if the left is not stopped.  The camel’s head got in the tent, the mile was taken when given an inch, and so we near the end of the ride down the slippery slope to communism in America and the world.  The federal financial infringement has now moved into the family, religious, and morality realm.  When money is allowed to be stolen from the people, the people’s focus on freedom and their ability to fight for it is sapped.  Many who would have the country return to its righteous and constitutional roots are preoccupied with providing for their families and lack the time to be involved in the fight for freedom.  Any extra time they might have for such activity is taken up earning enough to turn over to the bloated federal government so it can be wasted in about as many ways as can be imagined in the unnecessary and unconstitutional agencies concocted under the New Deal and the War on Poverty, and all the other unconstitutional expenditures.  We have a choice.  We can ignore what is going on or we can do our best to stop it.

 

 

Milgram America

We live in Milgram’s America.  Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University conducted an experiment in the 1960s to study obedience to authority.  What he found was astounding and helps to explain the degradation of the nation.

 

Obedience to authority can be a motivation to justify wrong behavior.  When authority such as government, academia, and media are accepted as the standards of thought and behavior, then thought and behavior tend to waver between truth and falsehood; between morality and immorality.  In the Milgram study, subjects were told to administer electric shocks to a person that was unseen in another room, and unbeknownst to the subject, was actually an actor pretending to receive the electrical jolts.  With each incorrect answer to questions the shock became increasingly severe, even to extremely dangerous levels.  Aware of this and hearing the person supposedly receiving the shocks scream with pain and begging to be released, the subjects continued the excruciation at the behest of the researcher.

 

Such obedience to authority can be bolstered through conditioning.  A famous study in 1901 by a Russian named Ivan Pavlov revealed that responses could be predicted through conditioning.  While studying the digestive system in dogs, he noticed that they would begin to salivate not only at the sight, smell, or taste of food, but even at just the appearance of those in white lab coats that would bring them the food.  Furthermore, it was learned that if food was repeatedly given to the dogs coinciding with a certain sound, eventually the dogs would salivate when hearing the sound without the food being presented.

 

Milgram’s and Pavlov’s findings are substantiated in society.  Many justify or go along with behavior that is clearly wrong, because their desire to engage in the wrong behavior is bolstered by authoritative figures.  These figures chorus continually ideas that are devoid of sound judgement.  Common sense and conscience lets us know right from wrong.  It would seem that there would be no need to counsel the correct course of thought on issues such as killing babies, same sex “marriage”, border protection, a balanced budget, a strong and honorable military, voter identification, adherence to the Constitution, and obedience to our Creator.

 

There are many wrongs that are considered right by many simply because authority says so and people are conditioned to think so.  Like the subjects in Milgram’s study, they are pressured to submit by one deemed to be an “expert”.  Like the salivating dogs in Pavlov’s experiment, the masses are conditioned to receive “free” things from those in authority; but unlike the unreasoning dogs, they do so in exchange for truth and honor.

 

For applicable quotes go to:  http://foundationfortruthinlaw.org/quotes.html

 

Below is an excellent read concerning the use of tax money:

 

A “sockdolager” is a knock-down blow. This is a newspaper reporter’s captivating story of his unforgettable encounter with the old “Bear Hunter” from Tennessee.

From “The Life of Colonel David Crockett”, by Edward S. Ellis
(Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)


CROCKETT was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me.

I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support—rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill. He commenced:

Mr. Speaker—I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it.

We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount.

There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt.

The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity.

Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Like many other young men, and old ones, too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.

Previous engagements preventing me from seeing Crockett that night, I went early to his room the next morning and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table.

I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied:

“You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it.”

He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished he turned to me and said: “Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen.”

I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:


SEVERAL YEARS AGO I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way.

The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.

The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them.

So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: “Don’t be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted.”

He replied: “I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say.”

I began: “Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and…”

“’Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.’

This was a sockdolager… I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

“Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the Constitution to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is.”

“I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question.”

“No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?”

“Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with.”

“Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?”

Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:

Davy Crockett“Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.”

“It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government.

So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other.

No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give.

The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.”

I have given you an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:

“So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.”

I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

“Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it full. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said there at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.”

He laughingly replied:

“Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.”

“If I don’t,” said I, “I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.”

“No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday a week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.”

“Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye… I must know your name.”

“My name is Bunce.”

“Not Horatio Bunce?”

“Yes.”

“Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me; but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go.”

We shook hands and parted.

It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before.

I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him—no, that is not the word—I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

But to return to my story: The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted—at least, they all knew me.

In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

“Fellow citizens—I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.”

I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

“And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

“It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.”

He came upon the stand and said:

“Fellow citizens—It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.”

He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.

I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.

“NOW, SIR,” concluded Crockett, “you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.

“There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week’s pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men—men who think nothing of spending a week’s pay, or a dozen of them for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased—a debt which could not be paid by money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it.”

 

 

 

 

Planned Parenthood Atrocities

Planned Parenthood’s name should be changed to Prevent Parenthood, and it should stop being touted as a health care provider. As recent videos from the Center for Medical Progress reveal, Planned Parenthood “doctors” not only brutally tear babies to pieces, they then sell the parts of the babies for profit. One video shows Planned Parenthood staff poking through a pie plate full of arms, eyes, lungs, and the rest of who should have been held close in a pink or blue blanket. The image that comes to mind instead is that of a horror movie involving mad scientists.

How have so many in our nation become so desensitized to the torturing and mangling of babies, even to the point of parting them out as if they are no more than an old car or a side of beef? Over half a billion dollars of our money is forced from us and handed to these butchers.

If so many in our nation have become capable of such savagery, condoning or turning a blind eye to it, what will be next in our path of “progress”? With government approved murder of those who are completely dependent on others for their every need, it is no wonder why there is a steady stream of senseless shootings and other such killings.

Even in light of the video evidence proving Planned Parenthood’s horrific practices, the U. S. Senate still refuses to vote to stop our tax dollars from funding Planned Parenthood’s houses of horror. The president and others who absorb our wages still hold this monstrous organization in esteem.

We have become a nation of pagans preserved only by the salt of those who obey the God that we are one nation under. To be effective, that salt cannot stay in the shaker.

For Center for Medical Progress videos, go to:

footage/http://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/cmp/investigative-footage/