Celebrating Independence By Celebrating Secession

This week we celebrate the 241st birthday of our Constitutional Republic. Former Congressman Allen B. West comes to my aid when he suggested that Americans should NOT celebrate the “Fourth of July” since this is just a day on a calendar. Rather, Americans SHOULD celebrate their “Independence Day” and their blessed heritage of “liberty under law” that resulted from the courageous actions of our founding fathers.

I heartily agree with Congressman West and would add that the central importance of what our founders did was intricately bound up in what they believed.  And what they believed they expressed concisely and precisely in the document they published on July 4, 1776.  Essentially they said:

1) There exists an Eternal God;

2) Our rights come from Him; and,

3) The purpose of government is to secure those very rights.

Recalling and celebrating these firmly held beliefs is the essence of our American heritage and the occasion to pass on the “Blessings of Liberty” to the next generation.

President John Adams, known as the Colossus of Independence, challenged all Americans that the Fourth:

“…Ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more. You will think me transported with Enthusiasm but I am not. I am well aware of the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see that the End is more than worth all the Means. And that Posterity will tryumph in that Day’s Transaction, even altho We should rue it, which I trust in God We shall not.”

Our founders laid down the immutable principles for the foundation of our civil government in that great document we call the Unanimous Declaration of Independence. It was a document of secession. Many are surprised to hear that, but that’s what it was; they were seceding from the government of Great Britain, separating to form a new country and a new civil government.

When the thirteen colonies of Great Britain in North America said that the king was not fit to be the ruler of a free people and declared their independence from his government, the British government over those thirteen colonies ceased to exist. They seceded and formed a new civil government, which they designed to secure the God-given rights of the people, who had formerly been under the government of the king.

So this Fourth of July, while you celebrate American secession and liberty, let’s not forget, in the words of Thomas Paine, “Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.”

Happy Independence Day America!

Learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.

Trump’s Twitter Bully Pulpit Is Causing The Left To Tremble

Last Sunday on CNN, the network’s White House correspondent, Jim Acosta, said that President Donald Trump’s tweet of a video that featured him wrestling an individual with a computer-generated CNN logo for a head was “going to lead to a journalist being hurt.”

As readers are likely aware, CNN has been at war with Trump since the week of his inauguration when, in an unprecedented move, the new president called out the network for being a purveyor of fake news.

Since the wrestling video tweet, many on the left, in the establishment press and even some Republicans have been engaging in a prodigious degree of hyperbole, claiming that Trump’s tweet of the video was tantamount to an incitement to violence and might lead to journalists getting injured or killed.

Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” Republican strategist Ana Navarro said Trump’s tweets about the press were likely to “get somebody killed in the media.” On Monday’s “MSNBC Live,” anchor Katy Tur said that Trump is effectively advocating violence against reporters.

Also on Sunday, CNN correspondent Tom Foreman took a wild stab at ginning up racialist sentiment over the tweet when he attempted to draw a connection between Trump’s alleged bigotry and the alleged creator of the wrestling video, who allegedly posted offensive content online in the past.

Obviously, the political left in America has conveniently chosen not to distinguish between satire (like the wrestling tweet) and the many outright incitements to violence in which they have engaged in recent months, and which some argue could have helped prompt James T. Hodgkinson to open fire on Republican lawmakers at a congressional baseball practice last month.

Of course, the left’s complaints are illustrative of the hypocrisy and projection to which I recently referred in this space, since it has been well-established that it is the left that typically acts out with violence, rather than the right.

Considering the Virginia congressional baseball practice shooting and the left’s penchant for fabricating news stories, it occurred to me that all they would have to do to ostensibly validate their claims would be to stage an active-shooter situation or some other form of violence at a press venue. One can only pray that they do not purpose to capitalize on this opportunity, but it would certainly be in keeping with their character.

It is apparent that the establishment press can’t take the heat in being called on their deceitfulness and fraud, since they typically react to Trump’s condemnation of their actions like overdressed 16th-century European nobles confronted by a mob of angry peasants brandishing rusty farm implements. Still, it is important to realize that they are responding in this manner not because they are dishonest, double standard-embracing, effete snobs with infantile sensibilities, nor even because they know that Trump is speaking the truth.

When news outlets feature President Trump charging them with proffering fake news, they know that many viewers will believe it by default. A feature of the bully pulpit, regardless of who happens to hold the office, is that the voice of an American president is louder than anyone else’s simply because it belongs to the American president.

In addition to the left’s stark dread over the prospect that Trump’s election signified a fundamental change in the course of politics in America, their current dismay lies in their knowledge of the power of the bully pulpit coupled with the potency of social media (in this case, Twitter). The call for Trump to stop tweeting because they deem it “unpresidential” is merely a pretext, an attempt to camouflage that fear.

Now, the left is faced with a president who is by no means bashful with regard to exploiting social media venues such as Twitter. Barack Obama and his surrogates employed social media quite deftly; however, Obama made great pretense toward appearing “presidential,” so the frequency and tone of his tweets were greatly attenuated compared to Trump’s.

Trump’s tone and proclivity for hitting back twice as hard when attacked reflects the New York street fighter who came up having to deal with the New York political and bureaucratic machine. If one owns so much as one rental property or a small business in New York City, one has to deal with gangsters; if not real, live Mafiosi, then operatives who behave in a modality nearly indistinguishable from same. Imagine how tough and savvy an individual has to be to realize huge success in real estate development in such an environment.

Though our president may not look like a street fighter, this is what he is, and it is to America’s benefit. Voters elected Trump because they were tired of presidents collectively shafting the electorate whilst appearing eminently presidential. Evidently, they were willing to take a chance on one who was willing to roll around in the gutter with his enemies, beat them at their own game and emerge with his hand-stitched silk business suit virtually unsoiled.

To understand the degree and the nature of the histrionics over President Trump’s use of social media, one must understand that the political left perceives it as a harbinger of the wholesale demise of their monopoly on the news and a potential negation of decades of progressive momentum in America. It’s that simple.

Article posted with permission from Erik Rush

Remember What Made America Great: Quotes from America’s Youngest Appointed Supreme Court Justice

While many Supreme Court Justices have strayed from what their roles is as justices at the Supreme Court level and engaged in legislating from the bench and being nothing more than political operatives in those seats, some in our history actually spoke straightforward about America, who she is supposed to be, how she was founded and the freedom purchased for her by our forefathers.

This Independence Day, I thought I would share some quotes with you for the youngest appointed Supreme Court Justice America had, Joseph Story.  While there are many chanting to Make America Great Again, and I agree with the slogan, the only way to do that is to repent before God, the God of the Bible, and begin, once again, to execute justice under the law.  Nothing else will makes us great again.  We will only continue to sink into the mire, unless God would turn us to Himself.

Turn thou us unto thee, O LORD, and we shall be turned; renew our days as of old. -Lamentations 5:21

In speaking of law, Story said at a speech at Harvard:

“There never has been a period of history, in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying at its foundation.” (1829)

In response to a pamphlet written by Rev. Jasper Adams, President of the College of Charleston, South Carolina, titled ‘The Relation of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States’, Story said:

My own private judgment has long been (and every day’s experience more and more confirms me in it) that government can not long exist without an alliance with religion; and that Christianity is indispensable to the true interests and solid foundations of free government.” (1833)

He would later write in a ruling:

“Christianity…is not to be maliciously and openly reviled and blasphemed against, to the annoyance of believers or the injury of the public….

It is unnecessary for us, however, to consider the establishment of a school or college, for the propagation of…Deism, or any other form of infidelity.

Such a case is not to be presumed to exist in a Christian country…

Why may not laymen instruct in the general principles of Christianity as well as ecclesiastics…

We cannot overlook the blessings, which such laymen by their conduct, as well as their instructions, may, nay must, impart to their youthful pupils.

Why may not the Bible, and especially the New Testament, without note or comment, be read and taught as a Divine Revelation…its general precepts expounded, its evidences explained and its glorious principles of morality inculcated?

“What is there to prevent a work, not sectarian, upon the general evidences of Christianity, from being read and taught in the college by lay teachers?

It may well be asked, what is there in all this, which is positively enjoined, inconsistent with the spirit or truths of the religion of Christ?

Are not these truths all taught by Christianity, although it teaches much more?

Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so perfectly as from the New Testament?” (1844, Vidal v. Girard’s Executors)

In expositing the US Constitution, Story wrote:

“At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and of the Amendment to it now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the State so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience and the freedom of religious worship.

An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.

But the duty of supporting religion, and especially the Christian religion, is very different from the right to force the consciences of other men or to punish them for worshiping God in the manner which they believe their accountability to Him requires…

The rights of conscience are, indeed, beyond the just reach of any human power. They are given by God, and cannot be encroached upon by human authority without a criminal disobedience of the precepts of natural as well as of revealed religion…

“The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance, much less to advance Mohammedanism, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical establishment which should give to a hierarchy the exclusive patronage of the national government.” (1840,  Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States)

In his Commentaries on the Constitution, Story wrote why the central government was restrained in the jurisdiction of religion, and notice he appeals to Christianity as religion, not anything else.

“In some of the States, Episcopalians constituted the predominant sect; in other, Presbyterians; in others, Congregationalists; in others, Quakers; and in others again, there was a close numerical rivalry among contending sects.

It was impossible that there should not arise perpetual strife and perpetual jealousy on the subject of ecclesiastical ascendancy, if the national government were left free to create a religious establishment.

The only security was in the abolishing the power.

But this alone would have been an imperfect security, if it had not been followed up by a declaration of the right of the free exercise of religion…

Thus, the whole power over the subject of religion is left exclusively to the State governments, to be acted upon according to their own sense of justice and the State constitutions.” (1833, Commentaries on the Constitution)

 

Why will America not look at their history and turn themselves back to the God who established us when our forefathers came to these shores and were set to glorify Him and advance His Gospel and His Kingdom here in the West?  It is because we have grown hard of heart and fail to heed His Word and those He has sent us to guard us from becoming a lawless people.  May God have mercy on us this Independence Day and return us to Himself.

You Want a Picture of the Future? Imagine a Boot Stamping on Your Face

“The Internet is watching us now. If they want to. They can see what sites you visit. In the future, television will be watching us, and customizing itself to what it knows about us. The thrilling thing is, that will make us feel we’re part of the medium. The scary thing is, we’ll lose our right to privacy. An ad will appear in the air around us, talking directly to us.”—Director Steven Spielberg, Minority Report

We have arrived, way ahead of schedule, into the dystopian future dreamed up by such science fiction writers as George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, Margaret Atwood and Philip K. Dick.

Much like Orwell’s Big Brother in 1984, the government and its corporate spies now watch our every move.

Much like Huxley’s A Brave New World, we are churning out a society of watchers who “have their liberties taken away from them, but … rather enjoy it, because they [are] distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing.”

Much like Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, the populace is now taught to “know their place and their duties, to understand that they have no real rights but will be protected up to a point if they conform, and to think so poorly of themselves that they will accept their assigned fate and not rebel or run away.”

And in keeping with Philip K. Dick’s darkly prophetic vision of a dystopian police state—which became the basis for Steven Spielberg’s futuristic thriller Minority Report which was released 15 years ago—we are now trapped into a world in which the government is all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful, and if you dare to step out of line, dark-clad police SWAT teams and pre-crime units will crack a few skulls to bring the populace under control.

Minority Report is set in the year 2054, but it could just as well have taken place in 2017.

Seemingly taking its cue from science fiction, technology has moved so fast in the short time since Minority Report premiered in 2002 that what once seemed futuristic no longer occupies the realm of science fiction.

Incredibly, as the various nascent technologies employed and shared by the government and corporations alike—facial recognition, iris scanners, massive databases, behavior prediction software, and so on—are incorporated into a complex, interwoven cyber network aimed at tracking our movements, predicting our thoughts and controlling our behavior, Spielberg’s unnerving vision of the future is fast becoming our reality.

Both worlds—our present-day reality and Spielberg’s celluloid vision of the future—are characterized by widespread surveillance, behavior prediction technologies, data mining, fusion centers, driverless cars, voice-controlled homes, facial recognition systems, cybugs and drones, and predictive policing (pre-crime) aimed at capturing would-be criminals before they can do any damage.

Surveillance cameras are everywhere. Government agents listen in on our telephone calls and read our emails. Political correctness—a philosophy that discourages diversity—has become a guiding principle of modern society.

The courts have shredded the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. In fact, SWAT teams battering down doors without search warrants and FBI agents acting as a secret police that investigate dissenting citizens are common occurrences in contemporary America.

We are increasingly ruled by multi-corporations wedded to the police state. Much of the population is either hooked on illegal drugs or ones prescribed by doctors. And bodily privacy and integrity has been utterly eviscerated by a prevailing view that Americans have no rights over what happens to their bodies during an encounter with government officials, who are allowed to search, seize, strip, scan, spy on, probe, pat down, taser, and arrest any individual at any time and for the slightest provocation.

All of this has come about with little more than a whimper from a clueless American populace largely comprised of nonreaders and television and internet zombies. But we have been warned about such an ominous future in novels and movies for years.

The following 15 films may be the best representation of what we now face as a society.

Fahrenheit 451 (1966). Adapted from Ray Bradbury’s novel and directed by Francois Truffaut, this film depicts a futuristic society in which books are banned, and firemen ironically are called on to burn contraband books—451 Fahrenheit being the temperature at which books burn. Montag is a fireman who develops a conscience and begins to question his book burning. This film is an adept metaphor for our obsessively politically correct society where virtually everyone now pre-censors speech. Here, a brainwashed people addicted to television and drugs do little to resist governmental oppressors.

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). The plot of Stanley Kubrick’s masterpiece, as based on an Arthur C. Clarke short story, revolves around a space voyage to Jupiter. The astronauts soon learn, however, that the fully automated ship is orchestrated by a computer system—known as HAL 9000—which has become an autonomous thinking being that will even murder to retain control. The idea is that at some point in human evolution, technology in the form of artificial intelligence will become autonomous and that human beings will become mere appendages of technology. In fact, at present, we are seeing this development with massive databases generated and controlled by the government that are administered by such secretive agencies as the National Security Agency and sweep all websites and other information devices collecting information on average citizens. We are being watched from cradle to grave.

Planet of the Apes (1968). Based on Pierre Boulle’s novel, astronauts crash on a planet where apes are the masters and humans are treated as brutes and slaves. While fleeing from gorillas on horseback, astronaut Taylor is shot in the throat, captured and housed in a cage. From there, Taylor begins a journey wherein the truth revealed is that the planet was once controlled by technologically advanced humans who destroyed civilization. Taylor’s trek to the ominous Forbidden Zone reveals the startling fact that he was on planet earth all along. Descending into a fit of rage at what he sees in the final scene, Taylor screams: “We finally really did it. You maniacs! You blew it up! Damn you.” The lesson is obvious here, but will we listen? The script, although rewritten, was initially drafted by Rod Serling and retains Serling’s Twilight Zone-ish ending.

THX 1138 (1970). George Lucas’ directorial debut, this is a somber view of a dehumanized society totally controlled by a police state. The people are force-fed drugs to keep them passive, and they no longer have names but only letter/number combinations such as THX 1138. Any citizen who steps out of line is quickly brought into compliance by robotic police equipped with “pain prods”—electro-shock batons. Sound like tasers?

A Clockwork Orange (1971). Director Stanley Kubrick presents a future ruled by sadistic punk gangs and a chaotic government that cracks down on its citizens sporadically. Alex is a violent punk who finds himself in the grinding, crushing wheels of injustice. This film may accurately portray the future of western society that grinds to a halt as oil supplies diminish, environmental crises increase, chaos rules, and the only thing left is brute force.

Soylent Green (1973). Set in a futuristic overpopulated New York City, the people depend on synthetic foods manufactured by the Soylent Corporation. A policeman investigating a murder discovers the grisly truth about what soylent green is really made of. The theme is chaos where the world is ruled by ruthless corporations whose only goal is greed and profit. Sound familiar?

Blade Runner (1982). In a 21st century Los Angeles, a world-weary cop tracks down a handful of renegade “replicants” (synthetically produced human slaves). Life is now dominated by mega-corporations, and people sleepwalk along rain-drenched streets. This is a world where human life is cheap, and where anyone can be exterminated at will by the police (or blade runners). Based upon a Philip K. Dick novel, this exquisite Ridley Scott film questions what it means to be human in an inhuman world.

Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984). The best adaptation of Orwell’s dark tale, this film visualizes the total loss of freedom in a world dominated by technology and its misuse, and the crushing inhumanity of an omniscient state. The government controls the masses by controlling their thoughts, altering history and changing the meaning of words. Winston Smith is a doubter who turns to self-expression through his diary and then begins questioning the ways and methods of Big Brother before being re-educated in a most brutal fashion.

Brazil (1985). Sharing a similar vision of the near future as 1984 and Franz Kafka’s novel The Trial, this is arguably director Terry Gilliam’s best work, one replete with a merging of the fantastic and stark reality. Here, a mother-dominated, hapless clerk takes refuge in flights of fantasy to escape the ordinary drabness of life. Caught within the chaotic tentacles of a police state, the longing for more innocent, free times lies behind the vicious surface of this film.

They Live (1988). John Carpenter’s bizarre sci-fi social satire action film assumes the future has already arrived. John Nada is a homeless person who stumbles across a resistance movement and finds a pair of sunglasses that enables him to see the real world around him. What he discovers is a world controlled by ominous beings who bombard the citizens with subliminal messages such as “obey” and “conform.” Carpenter manages to make an effective political point about the underclass—that is, everyone except those in power. The point: we, the prisoners of our devices, are too busy sucking up the entertainment trivia beamed into our brains and attacking each other up to start an effective resistance movement.

The Matrix (1999). The story centers on a computer programmer Thomas A. Anderson, secretly a hacker known by the alias “Neo,” who begins a relentless quest to learn the meaning of “The Matrix”—cryptic references that appear on his computer. Neo’s search leads him to Morpheus who reveals the truth that the present reality is not what it seems and that Anderson is actually living in the future—2199. Humanity is at war against technology which has taken the form of intelligent beings, and Neo is actually living in The Matrix, an illusionary world that appears to be set in the present in order to keep the humans docile and under control. Neo soon joins Morpheus and his cohorts in a rebellion against the machines that use SWAT team tactics to keep things under control.

Minority Report (2002). Based on a short story by Philip K. Dick and directed by Steven Spielberg, the setting is 2054 where PreCrime, a specialized police unit, apprehends criminals before they can commit the crime. Captain Anderton is the chief of the Washington, DC, PreCrime force which uses future visions generated by “pre-cogs” (mutated humans with precognitive abilities) to stop murders. Soon Anderton becomes the focus of an investigation when the precogs predict he will commit a murder. But the system can be manipulated. This film raises the issue of the danger of technology operating autonomously—which will happen eventually if it has not already occurred. To a hammer, all the world looks like a nail. In the same way, to a police state computer, we all look like suspects. In fact, before long, we all may be mere extensions or appendages of the police state—all suspects in a world commandeered by machines.

V for Vendetta (2006). This film depicts a society ruled by a corrupt and totalitarian government where everything is run by an abusive secret police. A vigilante named V dons a mask and leads a rebellion against the state. The subtext here is that authoritarian regimes through repression create their own enemies—that is, terrorists—forcing government agents and terrorists into a recurring cycle of violence. And who is caught in the middle? The citizens, of course. This film has a cult following among various underground political groups such as Anonymous, whose members wear the same Guy Fawkes mask as that worn by V.

Children of Men (2006). This film portrays a futuristic world without hope since humankind has lost its ability to procreate. Civilization has descended into chaos and is held together by a military state and a government that attempts to keep its totalitarian stronghold on the population. Most governments have collapsed, leaving Great Britain as one of the few remaining intact societies. As a result, millions of refugees seek asylum only to be rounded up and detained by the police. Suicide is a viable option as a suicide kit called Quietus is promoted on billboards and on television and newspapers. But hope for a new day comes when a woman becomes inexplicably pregnant.

Land of the Blind (2006). This dark political satire is based on several historical incidents in which tyrannical rulers were overthrown by new leaders who proved just as evil as their predecessors. Maximilian II is a demented fascist ruler of a troubled land named Every country who has two main interests: tormenting his underlings and running his country’s movie industry. Citizens who are perceived as questioning the state are sent to “re-education camps” where the state’s concept of reality is drummed into their heads. Joe, a prison guard, is emotionally moved by the prisoner and renowned author Thorne and eventually joins a coup to remove the sadistic Maximilian, replacing him with Thorne. But soon Joe finds himself the target of the new government.

All of these films—and the writers who inspired them—understood what many Americans, caught up in their partisan, flag-waving, zombified states, are still struggling to come to terms with: that there is no such thing as a government organized for the good of the people. Even the best intentions among those in government inevitably give way to the desire to maintain power and control at all costs.

Eventually, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, even the sleepwalking masses (who remain convinced that all of the bad things happening in the police state—the police shootings, the police beatings, the raids, the roadside strip searches—are happening to other people) will have to wake up.

Sooner or later, the things happening to other people will start happening to us and our loved ones.

When that painful reality sinks in, it will hit with the force of a SWAT team crashing through your door, a taser being aimed at your stomach, and a gun pointed at your head. And there will be no channel to change, no reality to alter, and no manufactured farce to hide behind.

As George Orwell warned, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.”

Article posted with permission from John Whitehead

The Founding Forefathers Meant to Unite by Dividing with Truth

“Sad will be the day when the American people forget their traditions and their history, and no longer remember that the country they love, the institutions they cherish, and the freedom they hope to preserve, were born from the throes of armed resistance to tyranny, and nursed in the rugged arms of fearless men.” -Roger Sherman, signer of the Declaration of Independence

The Founding Fathers established documentation such as The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights and US Constitution, etc., which are set in place to Unify in righteousness (Leviticus 19:17) under God and separation from the wicked, as well as Tyrants (Matthew 10:34).

“Our constitution was made for a moral people and a religious people (Under the Christian umbrella). It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” –President John Adams

Study the Constitution. Let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislatures, and enforced in courts of justice. – President Abraham Lincoln

We know that history teaches us the lessons that many want to learn so that history does not repeat itself.  On the other hand, there are those who could care less about the lessons that need to be learned. I am now addressing those who do not want to see the evils of the past repeated in the present. After all, prevention is better than cure.

In this country, our forefathers, under God, have given to their posterity, the American people, the privilege of being the government. Remember what President Abraham Lincoln said:

“Government for the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Of course, he took from John Wycliffe who said:

“This Bible is for the government of the people, by the people and for the people.”

The Declaration of Independence, which our forefathers have handed to the past, present and future generations, reads:

“That to secure these (God given) Rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever and Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government” (Exodus 20; Amos 3:3; 2 Corinthians 6:14-19; James 4:4).

Then, we look to the preamble of the US Constitution to find “We the People (Are the government) of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union (All 50 states), establish Justice (According to God’s moral Law), insure domestic Tranquility…”

The Framers had good reason to seek to “insure” domestic tranquility. Literally “domestic tranquility” means peace and quiet at home—at home in America, as opposed to in other nations. Tranquility for the Framers meant the absence of riots, rebellions, and similar symptoms of social disorder.

The Constitution continues, “…provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare (The concern of the government for the morality, peace and safety of its citizens. Providing for the welfare of the general public is a basic goal of government.), and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity (family lineage), do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love and reverence toward Almighty God…What a Utopia, what a Paradise would this region be. –John Adams wrote in his diary entry dated February 22, 1756