What makes the first Amendment important enough for it to get to skip to the front of the line?
The Constitution created the government. In this Contract the federal government is given enough power to protect people's unalienable rights from being damaged by foreign aggressors and other individuals.
The Contract also limits the federal government to ensure that the government itself never became the oppressor and destroyer of those rights.
Once you fully understand those two statements, the reason the First Amendment is first is obvious.
Our rights come from a power higher than the government. If the government could mandate a state religion, there would be no power higher than the official government endorsed religion. Thus our unalienable rights would in essence come from our government, and thusly could be taken away by them. Pretty simple isn't it?
And that whole Free Speech and Assembly, and Freedom of the Press part?
Well, that was put in to make sure we had a way to find out what was going on and could let other people know about it if the government ever got the bright idea to not honor the Contract and give itself powers which we the people hadn't consented to grant them.
The Ten Commandments in a courthouse, prayer in school, and manger scenes in the town square have nothing to do with the purpose of the First Amendment. But by arguing about it and creating more federal laws to deal with, the politicians in control of our government get to increase the power of the government they control. And in the process, they get to become the final word on what constitutes open expression of religion and alienate people from their unalienable rights.
Who needs to create a religion to do this? When you have the power to rule over God, you become God. Which is exactly what the First Amendment was created to prevent.
And you know what? Most of the country really believes that they are God. How else could you explain voting for someone who will make our problems go away instead of voting for a man like Ron Paul who would actually preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States?
By the way, that's the last line of the Presidential Oath of Office. But if you're God, or his boss, placing your hand on the Bible and taking that Oath wouldn't really mean much would it?
Your Fellow American,
John Armstrong
P.S. I am going to start posting all of my articles on a website called www.hardtorecall.com (as in hard to recall one's Oath of Office). If you like my articles, go and enter your email address in the subscribe section so you won't miss any. I'll always post here first, but we don't have a subscribe link as of yet and I'm trying to spread this message in as many ways as possible.
As always, unlike the NFL, you have the author's permission to do whatever you'd like with this including giving accounts of, rebroadcasting, retransmitting it, posting it on your own blog, printing it, whatever, to promote the Restoration of our Republic.
©2008 John Armstrong, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Monday, February 25, 2008
Last modified: Monday, February 25, 2008
The views expressed in this article are those of John Armstrong only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. John Armstrong is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by John Armstrong of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By John Armstrong |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-02-26 09:42:17
Dear John,
I am actually pretty new to the study of the constitution myself, but I think its more effective to those who also the same as I to paste in the 1st amendment text somewhere in your text. Please keep on writing, Jake
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Posted By: Adrien Monteleone
Date: 2009-06-04 23:21:51
Actually, the ratified 1st Amendment, was the 3rd on the list. The first two did not get enough ratifications to become part of the Constitution. (the 2nd one did in 1992 and is listed as the 27th Amendment.)
It is very telling though that the real first amendment proposed dealt with ensuring that House districts did not get too large to the point where Congressman were not able to represent their consituents. The second (now 27th) prevented them from raising their own pay without facing the voters in an election.
Of course the representation amendment was messed up in the debates and an incorrect version was passed. So it wouldn't help if we ratified it today. It would need to be resubmitted.
(and the 27th is circumvented by COLA's)