What did our Framers really say we must do when the federal government usurps power?
They never said, “When the federal government ignores the Constitution, amend the Constitution.”
They never said, “File a lawsuit and let federal judges decide.”
Instead, they advised two manly remedies. We’ll look at one of them – nullification – in this paper. 1
First, let’s look at the Constitution we have.
Our Federal Government has Enumerated Powers Only
With our federal Constitution, we created a federal government. It is:
- A federation of sovereign States united under a national government ONLY for those limited purposes itemized in the Constitution;
- With all other powers reserved by the States or the People.
We listed every power we delegated to the federal government: Most of the powers delegated over the Country at large are listed at Article I, §8, clauses 1-16.
Numerous conversations I have with folks have shown me that there are a number of people out there that not only believe that President Obama is an anti-American President, but that he is a Muslim. In the end, it is all speculation, for Barack Obama has never given anyone indisputable evidence regarding his faith, which is why Scott Walker accurately indicated he had no idea what Obama’s faith is.
However, regardless of if you believe that Obama owns a Muslim prayer rug, or if you think he’s a Christian with a “Reverend Jeremiah Wright” G-Damn America splash of crazy in his religious thinking, or if you support the idea that Obama is a Godless Communist that rejects faith but appeases Islam because it serves his purpose, his actions and words tell a very interesting story that suggests he personally feels hostility towards Christianity, and is sympathetic to the followers of the false prophet Muhammad.
There is only one reason to be a defender of the Second Amendment, the same reason the Framers had when they wrote it: fear of an overbearing government. As Thomas Jefferson said, “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
Of course, those opposed to gun ownership will respond that there is no tyranny in government. The answer to that is governments all over the world within the last 100 years have killed more than 262 million of their own citizens. See R.J. Rummel, Death By Government (Transaction, 1997).
Most Americans are unaware of this sinister aspect of modern history, which Rummel calls “Democide,” and when they find out, a common response is denial, then after ten minutes on the internet, amazement. Many such innocents then insist that it can’t happen here. The simple answer to the can’t-happen-here idea is that anything can happen anywhere, and it’s not as if this slaughter was centuries removed from us or limited to a single country.
Many on the left will dismiss the need to protect against overreaching government merely because they believe the more power the government has, the better, for it has been their experience that only big government is likely to deliver what they cannot get otherwise. They do not believe big government capable of oppression. Such people will never recognize the validity of gun-rights arguments.
I have made no bones about the fact that the ultimate authority on the issue of homosexuality is the Bible and it is crystal clear in condemning it. If others want to cite polls and commentaries and “experts” to attempt to bolster their claim in favor of homosexuality they are welcome to do so. However, what I find a bit disingenuous are those that will talk about rights within the context of the Constitution, which was written by men, not God as though the men who wrote it and backed it would have sided with practicing homosexuals today on the issue of marriage. I can tell you that the issue of marriage would have never been addressed as it is today, simply because the view of homosexuality was addressed first, thus making the point of same-sex “marriage” a ridiculous notion.