HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
July 5, 2003 That which is profound is easily stated, but hard to fully explain. You may have noticed that the Constitution and Bill of Rights is a very reticent document, and just what one would expect of something designed for freedom. The Founders of the U.S.A. were dealing with profound, yet far-reaching concepts, and steered clear of a document which would look like the I.R.S. Code. The I.R.S. Code is not designed for freedom, and is in no way profound. It is complicated, crass, convoluted, cold, clinical, and those are its good points. The I.R.S. Code is purposefully verbose, so that at any given moment American Citizens are, in some way, in violation of the Code. It makes us understand that the Constitution is only as useful as we are free. That's profound. The Soviet Union had a Constitution, but the people weren't free. Of late, the Supreme Court of the U.S.A. has decided that the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law, doesn't guarantee anything of the sort. Hey, this is getting more and more profound! The Oligarchy-of-Nine, which now makes all the final decisions for Americans, are not going to be able to explain this profundity except by saying, "We said so, that's why." Of course, they do it in legal language, and they do it so well. Yet, why is the 14th Amendment so important? What about the 2nd, and what about the 10th? No one part of the Constitution or Bill of Rights should be anymore important than the rest of the parts. Truth be told, the terms 'Constitution' and 'Bill' are singular. We don't have 'Bills' of Rights. If it were written in 2003 we would have 'Constitutions' and 'Bills of Rights'. Like the I.R.S. Code, the State-Church would have a foot either on the front of your neck, or the back of your neck. You choose which one is more comfortable. What I mean to say is, if you smash a beautiful vase, chances are that the short, stubby handles will remain intact, but this doesn't mean you still have a vase. As the Italians say, you have oo-vase. When the Oligarchy-of-Nine disregards one amendment, they have disregarded the whole Bill of Rights. If one rules against a Constitutional Article, one has ruled against the Constitution. Some parts may remain intact --- just put those in your hope chest. Why can't the great Constitution stand against the rulers of our land? Isn't it profound? First of all, the rulers of our Nation come from the same cultural current as all the rest of us. If the Body-Politic cannot see straight, why should a portion of it see straight? Fractal geometry assumes that, at whatever level one views an event, a small portion reflects the pattern of the whole. There's that 'profound thing' again. I cannot explain Fractal Theory, but I know it when I see it. I see our cultural configuration on the Police Force, on the Bench, in Congress. We are watching ourselves destroy the Constitution, and thus ourselves. Profound. Second, we have some nerve to think that a 200 year-old document should survive, when we have already tossed-away a 2000+ year-old document. Talk about chutzpah. What makes you think that the Constitution and Bill of Rights was based on gases found in the Horsehead Nebula!!? The answer: Government Temples (read public schools) teach you that construct. "The Constitution evolves!", they preach. So, to those with 'the courage to be new', let me give two examples of evolution: #1 - 2nd Amendment. You do NOT have the right to keep and bear arms. #2 - 14th Amendment. You do NOT have equal protection under the law. That evolution stuff is profound. When we tossed out the Scriptures, we cut the Constitution's mooring line. As it drifts away it looks, at any one moment, like an operational Constitution. But no! It is just drifting, waiting to be blown around by whatever P.C. wind comes along. When we tossed out the Scriptures, we tossed out self-government. Now, the Oligarchy-of-Nine will take things over from here on, thank you. When we tossed out the Scriptures, we tossed out true education, so that some reading this column don't even know what-in-heck I'm talking about. I own a book that was printed in 1950, put out by Stanford University Press. It's entitled, "Your Rugged Constitution." Well, it was only as rugged as our moral fiber. The Constitution is now masquerading as a ship under weigh, but it's really heading toward the rocks. Someone, please, strike-up-the-band! ------------ About the author: Joe Magoo is trained as a Theologian and Church Historian. He resides on Long Island, N.Y. He's in love with Ann Coulter, but she's seven feet tall, and Joe is only Five-Five. Email: joe572001us@yahoo.com Comment on this column in the forum. Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
