State's Rights?
Author: Ken Coman
•3:32 PM
One of the common themes I often hear when discussing our oversized and bloated federal government is "State's Rights." That theme almost kept us from becoming the United States and almost broke our Union during the Civil War. It was the battle cry of the South in the "War Against Northern Aggression" or the "War for State's Rights." It is the battle cry of many even today - especially among the very conservative. I do not fault them for that belief. However, they should think twice about ever promoting such a thing.

I plainly state that there never has been and never will be such a preposterous thing as "State's Rights" and you and I should stand against any such claim.

There are only Human Rights - your rights and my rights. The State of Connecticut has no rights. The state of Utah has no rights. The United States have no rights. Only the People have rights and we should never promote any non-person being somehow given rights.

These rights are unalienable and cannot be conferred or denied. The chief of these rights is the right to Life - all others mean nothing without that. A person may forfeit those rights by their actions and oppressive government may deny them but the people have them and governments and laws are instituted for the one sole purpose of protecting and preserving those rights. That is the role of government in a nutshell: to preserve your rights.

There is nothing sacred about a democracy that denies rights. I would rather live under a virtuous king that preserves his people's rights than a Republic that denies them. The form is not the important piece - whether it is a democracy, republic, monarchy, or theocracy. The important thing is whether the citizen's rights are preserved and protected. We should work more and more to not shore up states rights at both the federal and state level but to shore up human rights. When a state's interest supersedes a human right we should work for its eventual annulment and for the right of man to triumph.
, , , , | comments (2)
"And to the Republic for which it stands..."
Author: Ken Coman
•6:06 PM

"And to the Republic for which it stands..." These are words from our Pledge of Allegiance that all US citizens are invited to repeat.

A Republic is not a Democracy. Many, if not most, Americans believe that America is a Democracy. I only wish to point out how grateful we should be that America is not a Democracy. Democracy is a complete rule of the will of the people. Benjamin Franklin called our nation a nation of laws and not of men.

There are many times and examples in our Nation's history when the will of the people has trampled the rights of our Nation's citizens. Our country is rich with this sad history, such as hundreds of years of slavery, no political rights for women and landless men or people of any other race other than white Caucasian, segregation, and un-equal employment opportunities for our nation's citizens to name a few. I need not go any further to show that the will of the majority, even in a nation of laws, does at times trample on the rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness of others - even those for whom we thought it was self evident that they were created equal and endowed by their/our Creator with certain unalienable rights - the same rights for all.

Our system of government is truly magnificent. To have co-equal branches of government:

1. A Legislative that represents the pure will of the people,
2. An independent Executive that represents the interest of the Nation, and
3. An independent Judiciary that can strike down as lawless the laws of the land

is a marvelous thing. There is much talk of "Activist Judges" who do not follow the will of the people. However, their role is specifically not to follow the will of the people but to follow and interpret the law in accordance with the Constitution of their State and Nation.

We should thank God that we are one of the only countries on the earth that has such an independent Judiciary. I have often heard talk of people saying we should make terms for judges or make them elected by the people. Again, their role is not to represent the people. Their role is to represent the law. I feel the system as it has been designed where they are nominated by the Executive and confirmed by the Legislative is the proper system and it should not be changed.

There are times in our Nation's history when I wish we really would have had "Activist Judges" such as in the Dread Scott case. Let us not forget that "Activist Judges" were the ones who ended segregation, disparate treatment & impact, sexual harassment and other practices accepted by the majority. To have Liberty, and Justice for all, we must have a Republic and not a pure Democracy. Let our democratic voices be heard with our Legislature - let them write laws and our constitutions according to the timeless values, principles and laws that protect Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for all - but especially for those who cannot protect themselves - namely the unborn who cannot yet speak for themselves, children who are too young to speak for themselves, and the adult victims of crimes who are too afraid to speak for themselves. All of these are for whom Government is most intended and most needed. Let our voices be heard in our legislatures and ensure that they really do represent the will of the people.

"...And to the Republic, for which it stands, One Nation, under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all."
, , , , | comments (0)