Big Brother Constitution Politics

An Article V Convention Cannot Stop Federal Tyranny – Here’s what Can

I was called on Tuesday to speak to the South Carolina House Judiciary Committee concerning opposition to an Article V Constitutional Convention (and yes, it is a Constitutional Convention). Convention of States proponent Michael Farris was brought in to also speak to the committee. Various people from South Carolina voiced their opposition and I concur with what many of them had to say. The issue of an Article V Convention concerns many of us. Obviously, there is a concern of a runaway convention, just like in 1789, but more to the point is the fact that people actually believe they can curb tyranny with mere words on a piece of paper. This is what I sought to address.

The following is my very quick response, which because of time, I had to put together on the floor in the hallway before the meeting. I did make a few points along the way that are not contained in my notes, but I do hope they will cause people to think about how they are seeking to address tyranny in government. We will never deal with tyranny in government until we bring justice to bear on those that are tyrannical and those who are complicit in their tyranny.

When the Pilgrims arrived in America, they formed the Mayflower Compact, a mission statement of how their culture and their government was to exist.  That compact stated clearly that they settled for the glory of God and the advancement of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, defender of the Faith, etc.

Having undertaken, for the Glory of God, and advancements of the Christian faith and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents, solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic; for our better ordering, and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.

In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the 11th of November, in the year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, 1620.

America began as an explicitly Christian nation, in culture and government. Years later, she continued to exist until the period following the Revolutionary War.  At that time, she abandoned her first “constitution,” the Articles of Confederation.  According to the Articles of Confederation, it required unanimous consent of all 13 states in order to amend the document.  However, even though delegates had instructions from their states not to do anything but amend the Articles of Confederation, article VAt the time of the convention, Patrick Henry, that man we love to quote as saying, “Give me liberty or give me death” declared, “Baghdad_Obama (1)As for term limits, it sounds good, but doesn’t solve the problem of an uninformed public that votes a party line or a popular name, having no idea what the person actually believes, does or there record (Consider what many learned afterwards about Barack Obama, or what many continue to be ignorant of concerning Mitt Romney).  Further, it stifles those that do serve the people well from continuing to serve.  Personally, I think for the sake of the people and the representatives, the people should allow them to serve one term and then remove them through elections for both of their safety.

The rightful remedy for federal tyranny, according to Jefferson is interposition and nullification.  So far, we’ve seen South Carolina unable to pass a bill that was not nullification (we scrapped that because we wanted to keep more big government programs like Medicaid and Medicare), but simply sought to remove parts of Obamacare. If we won’t do that, why should we trust an Article V convention where a plethora of amendments are already being drawn up, even an entirely new constitution?

The problem, again, is men without Christian character and morals.

While I don’t believe our founders were all Christian men, I do think that most, at least with their mouths, made some form of appeal to Christian morality.

John Adams said that our Constitution was for a religious and moral people and that it was wholly inadequate to govern any other people. At that time, we were Christian.

George Washington in his famous farewell address said that no one could rightly call themselves a patriot if they sought to remove the indispensable pillars of religion and morality.  Indeed!  But whose morality?  Whose religion?

I contest that America has abandoned her God, the Father of the lord Jesus Christ and has in His place substituted the government which has grown into a tyrannical beast as part of the judgment of God.  Look around and see the wickedness of our nation.  That will not be solved with amendments.

It will be solved when the Church first repents of her sin and those in government, who are a part of the Church, recognize their duty to God, the protection of those that do good and the punishment of evil doers according to Romans 13:1-5.

The answer is not an Article V convention which leftists, socialists and communists have been trying to bring about for more than 5 decades.  The answer, I would humbly submit, is that we return and make our actions those that conform to “one nation under God,” the God of the Bible, holding up His law, His punishments, and His justice.

Then we will again know what it is to rejoice under the leadership of the righteous.  For now we are a people suffering under the wicked.

We have abandoned God’s law, and as William Penn rightly said:

“Men will either be ruled by god or be ruled by tyrants.”

Or as G. K. Chesterton aptly put it:

“If men will not be governed by the Ten Commandments, they shall be governed by the ten thousand commandments.”

I oppose an Article V convention based on the historical record that we have had an amendment convention that resulted in an entirely new constitution and abandoned the mention of Christianity explicitly, with new parameters for ratification.  I oppose it because amendments are not an answer to tyranny:  justice and the return to the cries of the revolutionary period of “no King but King Jesus” are.

To view my comments, you can click here and select “Thursday, May 14, 2015 Upon adjournment of the House
House Judiciary Committee — Judiciary Constitutional Laws Subcommittee.” They begin around 1:29:00. Michael Farris speaks at around 8:00.

from Freedom Outpost

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com


About the author

Tim Brown

Tim Brown

Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com, husband to his wife, father of 10, jack of all trades, Christian and lover of liberty. He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina. Tim is also an affiliate for the brand new Joshua Mark 5 AR/AK hybrid semi-automatic rifle.

Don't Miss Out!!

Get your daily dose of Eagle Rising by entering your email address below.

STAY IN THE LOOP
Don't miss a thing. Sign up for our email newsletter to become an insider.

Send this to friend