22 April 2005

Adding or Repealing Constitutional Amendments

The ultimate authority in this country is the Constitution. In order to change this document, the Congress must follow a specific set of procedures. These are outlined in Article V. "The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."
Tennessee has a similar procedure outlined in their Constitution (Article XI, Sect. 3). This being the case, how can the ACLU challenge the right of a sovereign state, to amend it's Constitution? Tennessee has passed a measure banning Same-Sex marriage fulfilling it's Constitutional requirements. Now the measure is set to go before the people for a popular vote. I can't for the life of me understand why the ACLU would be opposed to this. If the people want Same-Sex marriages to be lawful, then they will reject the measure and it would be up to the activist judges of the state to decide if such unions would be lawful. But if the people approve the proposed amendment to their Constitution,as prescribed in Article XI, Sect. 3, then it's truly the "will of the people". But the ACLU for some reason doesn't want the people to decide for themselves what they want. They would rather that matters such as these be settled in a courtroom in front of a few activist judges. In this way, they get paid, their agenda gets put forward, and their will gets shoved down our throats. And forever more we get to live with the decisions of a few "progressive" judges who have decided for themselves that the Congress and the people cannot make responsible law. In other words, they don't trust the American people to make the right decisions for ourselves. If you look hard at the rhetoric from the left, it's full of language that assumes that they are smarter than the rest of us. Judging by the troll traffic on our blogs, they assume that Conservatives are stupid. They assume that we are less educated then they are. That because they have progressive ideas, that makes them superior to the rest of us. That makes me remember several characters from a novel. George Orwell wrote a satire of Communism called "Animal Farm". In the novel, the pigs take over and move into the farmers house. They took on intellectually superior personalities. Do you see the similarities between the pigs in the novel and the ACLU? I do. And "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely". An observation that a person’s sense of morality lessens as his or her power increases. The statement was made by Lord Acton, a British historian of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It also applies to organizations. The goals of the ACLU are outlined in it's founder's own words. "I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself... I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal." Roger Baldwin, 1935, in a year book commemorating the Harvard graduating class of 1905 (source).


Post a Comment

<< Home