In case you hadn't guessed, today I'd like to talk about using the Constitution as a means to drive out leftist shenanigans, not only because the stakes are dire if we don't, but some of the greatest conservative minds can be found in the legal profession and serve as excellent models for each and every one of us.
Relativism, by its nature, seeks to tear apart institutions and the rule of law, particularly in their most enduring forms. This manifests in the leftist bias against age and wisdom (e.g. "the Framers were rich, Protestant white men") and as such, liberals will inevitably attempt to tear at the fabric of our greatest legal framework with their "dynamic" theories of interpretation. Even the most clear cut of statutes (look at the debates over the Second Amendment) are dissected by the Left to elevate the state and lower the standard of human expectation. Fortunately, our Framers anticipated that some of their successors might not be the brightest of folks, and subsequently ensured that their masterpiece would take quite the effort to circumvent completely. So yes, some conservatives may bemoan the progressive advances within the legal system (e.g. Roe v. Wade), yet the more that honest debates are had (and heard), the more we see the truth emerge, and often times victorious.
Take, for instance, this latest piece of news from the New American:
"The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a pro-life legal organization that focuses on constitutional law, today applauded an order by a federal appeals court granting a motion for a preliminary injunction – an order that temporarily blocks the implementation of the HHS mandate against a Missouri business owner."I won't recount all of my last post concerning the immature mindset by which leftists construct a right to contraception out of thin air. Suffice to say that it is here, in the battleground of the courtroom, that the true capacity to impact American life for the long-term exists. The Left's agenda is relatively linear and potentially limitless; the only question is to what degree does our court system bracket their abuse of power.
There are so many avenues by which defending the Constitution serves this purpose, and I won't go through each in detail. For me, a strong view of the commerce clause (too easily abused by big spenders from both parties) needs restoration and I was pleased with the portion of Chief Justice Robert's conclusions that dealt with Obamacare's violation of said clause. The tenth amendment is also vital in our modern age, with Roberts also being correct in striking down Obamacare's Medicaid mandate upon the states, even going as far as to describe it as "a gun to the head" of state governments. Many people I know (such as my father and roommate) are avid protectors of our right to bear arms as per the Second Amendment. I highly recommend each and every one of you go back, reread the Constitution a few times, and select a section or two you feel strikes or motivates you to action. You'd be surprised how amazing the Constitution is when you look at it through the lens of our founder's foresight and apply those concerns to our modern issues.
For so many liberals, ideals and dreams of utopia consist the basis of their argumentation, however presented as logical. Even if their arguments can appear partially true, it is up to conservatives and moderates alike to refer back to the document that governs us all and should rightly serve as a source of unity. This doesn't mean beating people's faces in with knowledge, but gently reminding them that when in doubt, our founders chose to have faith in the states over the fed, knowing that such risks will remain within our system of federalism as long as it lasts. The Constitution aids debates as it grounds the arguments in a certain field of governance and, being a neutrally-accepted standard, should serve to highlight areas in which our biases interrupt our attempts at objective interpretation. Lastly, legal theories often frame around precedent, a direct contradiction to progressive logic and a clear orientation towards past wisdom as a guide for present action. Legal precedent may be flawed at times, but where such flaws exist, there is usually a result of failure to consider prior precedent as well.
If you still need a reason to invest a few hours in our nation's most important document, just tune into Fox News or watch a YouTube segment of Jay Sekulow, a remarkable lawyer and legal theorist with excellent speaking capabilities. If every conservative dinner table conversation had one or two Sekulows, America would be a much better place. But in all seriousness, it is important that we access every resource possible (even friends in legal professions) to build a personal connection with and defense of our Constitution.
Liberals have abused court power for far too long.
No more.
No comments:
Post a Comment