The Final Test...

     …leading to

  Graduation Time

The Left is in a dilemma.  But actually, so is the Right.

First - the Left:

On the one hand, the Left wants a strong central government, as in Roe v. Wade, to force its will on the whole country in one ‘fell’ - easier - swoop.   

On the other hand, the Left applies the idea of a strong federated government, as in state gun-control laws.  

But wait.

From a conservative constitutionalist pov, Roe is illegal because the subject of abortion does not fall under any delegated powers of the federal government; which are “few and defined,” in the rather authoritative words of the man fairly known as the Father of the Constitution, James Madison(.1)  And even with the addition of the 14th Amendment’s ‘equal protection’ clause to the Constitution, that doesn’t change the fundamental nature of the ‘federal constitutional republic’ form of government of the U.S.  All the 14th did and does is say that the States can’t treat their citizens (U.S. citizens residing within their borders) differently, i.e., for example, one set of laws for the blacks and one set for the whites, or impose heavier sentences on individuals of different races, etc.; that all citizens are equal before the law.  (Nor can the States, under the terms of the 14th Amendment, deal with their citizenry arbitrarily as regards ‘due process of law’ - all have a right to a fair trial, etc..)  Thus the Left’s concern that with a more conservative makeup on the U.S. Supreme Court now under Trump, they will start losing court cases similar to the ones that they won under a more liberal-oriented SCOTUS.  But what about the ‘wedding cake’ cases, which conservatives have won twice now in the SCOTUS, under freedom of religion considerations: those decisions treat the Constitution as a reflection of a centralized form of government.

The wordings of many of the Bill of Rights seem to imply that they apply to all citizens.  But the First Amendment clearly refers only to the federal government.  (“Congress shall make no law respecting…”)  So the argument can be made that the ratifying State legislatures were clearly making sure that the new proposed federal government did not get too big for its britches without a Bill of Rights appended to the Constitution, to emphasize the limitations being placed on the central government by the Constitution, as one of limited and delegated powers, with their basic rights secured for them by their individual State constitutions.  But as these things go, some changes have crept in over the years, in attitude; and somewhere along the way, the Bill of Rights was made to apply, not from the States to the federal government, but from the federal government to the States.  The idea of ‘I know my constitutional rights’ having crept in to the public mentality.(2)      

And so, the question: 

Which is it.

I have an idea.

Let’s move beyond ‘it’.  Such questions.  And enter

a - the -  

New World.     

Living in alignment with the Will of our Creator Source.  With The Play over.  And the beginning of

the Real Thing.

Now.  How to live in alignment with that higher Will?  And for all of us children of our mutual Creator??  And not have it just be a babble of voices???

I’ve got an idea.

Go within.  And see whose voice you trust.  When you put the matter to that test.

—

footnotes:

(1) ‘The Federalist Papers,’ No. 45.

(2) The argument is that it happened with the 14th Amendment’s imposition in various ways on the States, in the aftermath of the Civil War.  But as I have indicated above, the 14th clearly does not say, nor did it intend to say, the equivalent of ‘All the powers formerly reserved to the Sates or to the people shall now reside in the federal government’.

   They have been made to, by a bit of legalistic legerdemain called ‘incorporation’ - i.e., the idea that the terms of the Bill of Rights were all ‘incorporated’ into the terms of the 14th Amendment, and thus now under the power and control of the federal government.  But that is pure poppycock, as the historical record of the intent of the 14th’s authors makes clear.  But that hasn’t stopped shyster lawyer types from attempting to claim that that happened - or to claim that the Constitution is ‘a living document,’ subject merely to the socio-political whims of the majority on the Supreme Court justices at any given time, rather than the contract that it is, subject to an amending process.  

   Which brings up the subject that there is the additional murky business of the fact that the 14th Amendment doesn’t appear to have been legally ratified, anyway.

   What a mess.

   What to do.

   Read on. 

—

Meanwhile, back in The Play; and speaking of such things as whose voice to trust in things:

from thecommonsenseshow.com: ’New York Times Claims the US Has Implanted Grid Kill Switch In Russia’ - Dave Hodges - June 18

(Under the/my ‘Subject’ heading:

All The News That’s Print To Fit)

Stan Stanfield - June 18

Not good.  The sign of a typical plan by the DS at work.  This sort of 'news' sets up the idea that when our country's energy grid is taken down, we're all supposed to think and say that the Russians did it, in retaliation, when all the time it was the DS up to their shenanigans, and then all hell is supposed to break out.  Getting rid of both Russia and the U.S. - the plan of the DS at work.  

If their Ebola scare doesn't get us into their FEMA 'quarantine' camps first.

—

As I indicate:

Things seem to be coming to a head…

Time to make a decision.

Up.  And out of this 'grade'.

Or just having to go through our Process all over again.  Having failed, 

the final test, at

Graduation time.