Day By Day© by Chris Muir.

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

The Constitution has been folded and spindled, and will soon be completely mutilated

Stellar thoughts from a longer Selwyn Duke column at The American Thinker:

As my richly sarcastic tone informs, the notion of a living Constitution does not find favor with me. However, it would be incorrect to simply state that it’s a philosophy to which I don’t subscribe. No, let me say, unabashedly and unyieldingly, that the idea that our Constitution is a living document is not a legitimate point of view. I shall repeat, despite its wide embrace among certain so-called experts and laymen alike, what I will call “constitutional-relativity” is in no way, shape or form a philosophy that warrants anything but a dismissive laugh. It is nothing but a lie, a grand illusion, a judicial Trojan Horse that conceals tyranny and wears the guise of intellectualism. To fully grasp the supreme betrayal that constitutional-relativity constitutes we first must understand the nature and value of our Constitution. Our Constitution is, in effect, the contract that the American people have with each other. It’s much like the situation when a group of people pools its talents and resources to form a business: one of the first steps they will take is to draw up a contract. The purpose of doing so is to ensure that all parties will understand their rights and responsibilities, and to ensure that the business partners with greater clout won’t be able to trample upon the rights of those with lesser. What would happen, though, if the contract were rendered impotent, if respect for its dictates had diminished to a point where people thought nothing of violating them? Well, then no one’s rights would be secure. Might would make right, and those who had the power to impose their will would hold sway, while those who lacked the power would become downtrodden. Likewise, our national contract serves the same purpose, as it is our governmental firewall against tyranny. For instance, if the majority elects representatives who would vote to strip a minority of their freedom of speech or, God forbid, to exterminate them, our Constitution would prevent them from achieving their nefarious ends. That is, assuming that the contract has been held sacrosanct. Once rendered impotent, however, it lacks the weight to constrain even the most twisted manifestations of perverse popular will. Ironically, while our Constitution was designed to protect minorities from the unjust whims of the majority, it is now being used to impose the unjust whims of minorities upon the majority.