Old Doesn't Mean Outdated
By: Bastiatarian
In today's "progressive," "post-modern" world, we often hear disparaging comments of ideas and concepts that have been around for a long time. One target of such accusations is the Constitution of the United States of America. The accusers would have the Constitution be a "living" document, in the sense that not only the particulars, but the fundamental concepts embodied in it be malleable and changed to accommodate the "new morality" (which is nothing but the old immorality).
Seventy years ago, David O. McKay stated that
These statements are as valid in 2010 as when they were originally made. The principles of liberty, just as all truth, is not relative, is not malleable, and is not subject to the whims of navel-gazing "progressives." They are not changed by public opinion, the decisions of courts, or political expediency.
As the Obama administration is demonstrating so spectacularly, policies that decrease the ability of individuals to exercise their right to control their own lives, to direct the use of their own property, as they see fit, have always failed and will always fail.
Unless, of course, the goal of those policies is the enslavement and ultimate destruction of nations. As the examples of Rome, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union (just three of a multitude of examples, ancient and modern) make vividly clear, in that area, they are of maximum effect.
In today's "progressive," "post-modern" world, we often hear disparaging comments of ideas and concepts that have been around for a long time. One target of such accusations is the Constitution of the United States of America. The accusers would have the Constitution be a "living" document, in the sense that not only the particulars, but the fundamental concepts embodied in it be malleable and changed to accommodate the "new morality" (which is nothing but the old immorality).
Seventy years ago, David O. McKay stated that
there are some fundamental principles of this Republic which, like eternal truths, never get out of date, and which are applicable at all times to liberty-loving peoples. Such are the underlying principles of the Constitution, a document framed by patriotic, freedom-loving men...Seventeen years later, former Under Secretary of State and Ambassador to Mexico J. Reuben Clark observed that the Constitution's "great principles are as applicable, efficient, and sufficient to bring today the greatest good to the greatest number, as they were the day the Constitution was signed."
These statements are as valid in 2010 as when they were originally made. The principles of liberty, just as all truth, is not relative, is not malleable, and is not subject to the whims of navel-gazing "progressives." They are not changed by public opinion, the decisions of courts, or political expediency.
As the Obama administration is demonstrating so spectacularly, policies that decrease the ability of individuals to exercise their right to control their own lives, to direct the use of their own property, as they see fit, have always failed and will always fail.
Unless, of course, the goal of those policies is the enslavement and ultimate destruction of nations. As the examples of Rome, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union (just three of a multitude of examples, ancient and modern) make vividly clear, in that area, they are of maximum effect.
If it ain't a broken, don't you go tryin' to fix it.
ReplyDeleteSilly progressives...
Donald Borsch Jr.
Bethel, CT
You of course then support slavery, oppression of womans vote, or to own property, and the many other rights which have been decided by the Supreme Court since 1789. "Original intent" right?
ReplyDelete>You of course then support slavery, oppression of womans vote, or to own property
ReplyDeleteIf you think that the original intent of the Constitution was to legitimize slavery or so-called "oppression" of women, etc., then you either have never read the Constitution, or you are a complete moron.
Your comment suggests that both apply. Good luck in your future endeavors.
I notice that "anonymous" somehow changed the subject from the constitition to the supreme court, a tactic used by those who know they can't win an honest argument. Interestingly enough, it was mostly democrats who supported the actions that he belittled, especially slavery. I guess if ignorance is bliss, he should be a very happy man (or woman).
ReplyDeleteExcellent material.
ReplyDeleteIt never ceases to amaze(and amuse) me that progresivs like Anon can even come up with such ridiculous off the wall statements.
I suppose Gorges is right. Ignorance is bliss.
Or as they say at Truth 101 (The Big Lie) site following the progressive herd gives comfort.