Weeknights 5 PM CT
on AFR

Sep 4, 2024 · 50 minutes

Would you look at that… the U.S. Constitution is the problem. According to Regressives that is.

Play episode49:31. Keeps playing while you browse.

Taller bars mean faster talk at that point in the show. Tap any line of the transcript to play from there.

The Hamilton Corner logo above Abraham Hamilton, III on the show's set

Show notes

0:00 - 15:00. 1 Peter 3:13-16. Reason and persuasion is intrinsic to Christ-following. 15:00 - 31:00. Would you look at that… the U.S. Constitution is the problem. According to Regressives that is. 31:00 - 48:00. Two Marines were attacked during a regularly scheduled port visit in Turkey. To donate call : 877-616-2396

Phone lines mentioned

  • 877-616-2396

Share this episode

Transcript

6,971 words, in two-minute parts. Made by machine, so a few words may be off.

0:0049:31

  1. 0:00

    Darkness is not an affirmative force. It simply reoccupies the space vacated by the light. This is the Hamilton Corner on American Family Radio. It should be uncomfortable for a believer to live as a hypocrite. Delivery people out of the bondage of mainstream media. And the philosophies of this world. God has called you and me to be His ambassador. Even in this dark moment. Let's not miss our moment. And now the Hamilton Corner. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Hamilton Corner. I'm your host, Abraham Hamilton, III. My heart is a bit heavy as this news is breaking out of Georgia to Appalachian High School. We are 14-year-old student. From the school has been identified as the alleged perpetrator, perpetrator, what all transpired there. Today, if you hadn't heard about it yet, and I'm just, just heavy hearted about it, man. Four people murdered two teachers, two students, total of 30 people injured. Our heart breaks for the family of the victims. I feel like as a society, we continue to put our heads in the sand collectively, you know, and you know what's going to happen. It's going to be the the obvious, you know, calls for gun control, predictable gun control calls, those things are going to happen. But we're conveniently ignorant of the fact that the United States of America has the exact same percentage of firearms to the population as we've always had, right, of all of American history.

  2. 2:12

    What we do not have that we used to have was a collective reverence for God. And it's just heartbreaking. This is a bit of breaking news as this shooting happened to happen today. All of the people involved are just on my heart. So I would just ask you to pray for the people in Georgia. And this 14-year-old young man, according to reports that I've come across, with these murder charges, it's expected he'll be tried as an adult. Obviously, this is early in the process and that could change. that that is where things are. All right, now the Bible tells us very plainly, man, where do murders come from? It comes from the human heart. It comes from the human heart. We have people all the time talking about gun violence, gun violence, we don't, people don't talk about knife violence in these areas of gun control. We don't talk about all these other things. When you, when a society rejects the giver of life, life is no longer held valuable. just heavy hearted at the moment. My man, a hundred grand, Mr. Bobby Arroza is in the building right across from me, the real J. Mac often imitate and never duplicated as in the studio. We ready to rock and roll with today's show. You know, one of the things, and even before I learned about what was happening in Georgia, one of the things I wanted to talk about was the historical occurrence. You might have heard about this before, maybe even read about it, or in an encyclopedia Britannica. You might even seen this in the museum.

  3. 4:13

    It's called, loving your neighbors, enough to talk to them. Remember when we used to do that? And I know in a lot of parts of our country, in many parts of our country, people still do it. But it is a declining phenomenon. It's a declining phenomenon. And I simply today want to spend a little bit of time to encourage you to love your neighbors enough to talk to them. to talk to them, to be willing first and able second, to converse with the people around you. We can have conversation as adults, even when we disagree. We should be able to disagree in a respectable manner and a respectful manner, because all people are made in the image of God. As a result, all people are worthy of respect. It doesn't mean that you have to accept everybody's points of view. But all people worthy of respect. So we engage them with respect, but we nevertheless have the opportunity to convey transcendent truth. Just go in the Word of God to 1 Peter chapter 3, 1 Peter chapter 3. And I want to discuss something that is intrinsic to Christ following. Alright, this is a very, very familiar passage of Scripture. 1 Peter chapter 3 verses 13 through 16 is where I'm going to go today. All right. And this is what the Word of God says is what the Lord says to us through the apostle Peter. And it's amazing to hear this coming from Peter because you remember his history. He was, how shall I say this? A socially obtuse man. And that weren't. You remember when he was pressed when Jesus was being arrested ultimately to be crucified and he wanted a distance himself from Jesus?

  4. 6:13

    He used choice language. Yes, yes. I don't know the man. Blah, blah, blah. So we couldn't play what Peter said around the fire on these airways. That's in the scripture. We know that his trade was out of a fisherman, which at the time he was a commercial fisherman, so he wasn't just casting a line, he was fishing with nets and had a blue collar investment if you will. And it is this socially obtuse, blue collared Peter whom the Lord uses to convey this to us through, which will simply convey that none of us have any excuse. All right. And this is what the word of God says. Now, who is there to harm you if you're zealous for what is good? But even if you should suffer for righteousness sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them nor be troubled, but in your hearts, honor Christ, the Lord is holy, always being prepared to make a defense or some translations there say to give a reason to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you. Yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience so that when you are slandered, not if when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ, maybe put to shame, maybe put to shame. Now this is amazing, especially coming from the person from whom it is coming, whom our Lord conveyed this to us through. This is Peter. You know, remember around the fire, I don't know the man. Wasn't an erudite rabbinical scholar.

  5. 8:14

    No. Peter was your regular blue collar dude, and he is the one that our God uses to convey the reality that Christ following, intrinsic to Christ following, is rationality, reason, and persuasion. All right, the text conveys honor Christ, honor Christ the Lord as holy in your hearts, in our hearts, that always is the starting point. Then we have a command given to us, always be ready to give a reason or to make a defense. that phrase in English comes from the Greek word Apologia. Apologia, that's where the discipline of apologetics derives its description from. All right? This is the blue collar, formerly colorful language using Peter, whom the Lord is speaking to us through, and say, man, by the way, you need to always be ready to articulate what you believe and why you believe it. You should always be ready to give a reason for the hope that you have. Always be ready to convey. Why? I've used this analogy before. Y'all know I'm from New Orleans, Louisiana. One of the things that you can call it a cultural pastime in my hometown is eating. And one of the things you'll find, some of the nicest people in the entire world living in New Orleans, Louisiana. And if you walk up to somebody and on the street, you can find a stranger, say, man, why can't I find a good bowl of gumbo? You can get a lot of answers. None of them are gonna be the commercial joints. where the tourists go to, all right? Because when you get a good bowl of gumbo, you want people to know. And this is good, I think that people know. Anybody who has good news, you're gonna wanna share it. We have an entire epistle from the Apostle Paul to the church at Colossae.

  6. 10:20

    But remember Paul didn't evangelize in Colossae first, look in chapter one, right at about verse eight, it was this guy named me Paphras. This is cat named me Paphras. He'd gone over to Ephesus, heard the gospel preached. The Lord opened his heart for salvation, and he came home and did what anybody would do. When you have an amazing life-changing encounter, you start telling people, probably started with his family and his coworkers. And as he's sharing what has happened to him or that's another good poll boy, listen, if you're in New Orleans, you wanna get a good poll boy, I'll just tell you, and they ain't even giving me any money for this, but going around on St. Anthony Street in the Seven Awards to Zimmers. That's not that's what it's shrimp po boy. Now if you want other ones, I got some other recommendations for you But I just start there looking Bobby's taking notes. I got some others for you You know, but I just start with that one But he patters did what anybody would do similar to woman at the well the Bible says that after she Encounters Jesus She goes back home and tells everybody coming me the man who's told me everything about my life This wasn't some commitment I want to join the new North American Mission Board and go and evangelize my city. No, it's just the overwhelming excitement of life change You gotta meet this man and here the Lord is using And ministering through blue collar former colorful language using non-scholarly nontheologically trained in the formal sense So much so when he was prior prior to when he and John were before the Sanhedrin and they heard Peter speak They're like, man, what did this do? Go to school, so to speak. Where did he learn? And then he's like, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, he's been with Jesus. This is something for all of us. Doesn't matter your background, your educational level, whether you're articulation of the King's English or lack thereof, we are commanded to always be ready to share with somebody.

  7. 12:31

    And what's envisioned there, because I know a lot of people try to absent themselves from the scope of this text by saying, Always ready if anyone asks you. No, no, the scripture is the same. You just sit around and wait. I was saying, well, God, nobody asked me any questions. No, it is that we live our lives in such a way to where it provokes inquiry. How can you in the year of our Lord, 2024, live life with so much hope? How can you be unshaken by the thing that surround us? How can you? It is a life lived, a quality of life that is lived that provokes inquiry and And then when the inquiry that corresponds to that peculiar life on display, we're always ready to convey. Intrinsic to Christ following is us having a reasoned faith that we can articulate but guess what that requires. Where as you and I have studied to show ourselves approved, every Christ following should be a theologian. That means you got to have letters behind your neighbor degrees and things of that nature. All it means is that we are study, we study students of God, theos, God is a root, logos, logic, understanding. That's the compound word that comprise theology. We should all be discipline learners of our faith, but it doesn't mean that you have to have a certain quotient, a certain quotient that you have to ascribe to in order before you can say anything to anybody. No use what you have. If all you know is if a gospel loved the world that he gave us only we got in son, that whosoever should believe on him, shall not perish, have everlasting life, go with what you know, use what you got. And the scripture says as you use what you have, more will be added to you, but we have to use what we have. Reason and persuasion are intrinsic to Christ's Christ following. We should be the people that are most willing to engage our neighbors and engage our loved ones.

  8. 14:39

    It's an indictment on the body of Christ that the world only knows that Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses actually go out of their way to reach out to others. If we have the truth, don't you think we should live the truth? And when we live the truth, what we live will be shared as we convey what we know. Meet Kelsey. When she found out she was pregnant, she wasn't sure where to turn. But after meeting with the counselors at a pre-born network clinic who loved and supported her, and after hearing her baby's heartbeat on a free ultrasound, she chose life. When a mother looks at her child through a sonogram, it does something to you. You know, I ended up deciding to keep my son, who is now five years old today. He's amazing. He brings absolute joy to my heart. I could not imagine life without him. Not only did they help me save his life, they saved my life. By introducing a woman to her baby on ultrasound, a baby's chance at life doubles. If you have the means, would you consider a leadership gift to save babies in a big way? Your tax-deductible donation of $5,000 will sponsor Preborn's entire network for 24 hours, helping to rescue 200 babies, to donate Dial Pound 250 and say the keyword baby that's pound 250 baby or donate securely at preborn.com. That's preborn.com. Shining light into the darkness. This is the Hamilton quarter on American family radio. Welcome back to the Hamilton corner, Abraham Hamilton. The third here, we should be willing, ready and confident as we engage our neighbors. And again, if there's no, if we're all in the process of learning and growing. But we should also use what we have, use what we have. Now, this is something that I've been, you know, I've been having in my preparation stack for a while and I feel like it's important to get to this now. And I know and I'm planning to, I guess, forensically examine the 18 minutes of recording recorded propaganda that CNN provided to us from Kamala Harris and her emotional support governor, Tim Walz. But I want to have a conversation about this first. And we may get to that interview tomorrow.

  9. 17:32

    Maybe we'll see. This happens every four years, but no, not every four years. This has happened every four years dating back as far as I can recall. I know it's happened before, but I'm talking about the cyclical occurrence really dating back to the Obama years, as far as I can recall. And what I'm talking about is these purported scholarly musings for the need for the American populace to jettison the US Constitution. In fact, no, it goes back further than that. I can remember, you know, during John Kerry's attempt to run for the presidency, that you had all of this kerfuffle about the electoral college, you know, being undemocratic. And it's like, yeah, and it's intentionally not undemocratic. It's just constitutionally Republican with democratic features. And as many of you know, Article four of the US Constitution guarantees to every US citizen a Republican form of government. This dates back to the late 1800s. I mean, it started late 18th century, has nothing to do with political partisanship. It has everything to do with structure of government and over the Labor Day weekend and continuing on up to now. I mean, I could rattle off probably 40 different purported scholarly articles that are going calling for the complete abandonment of the US Constitution. Get rid of it in total. You know, one of those is an example I have right here from the New York Times, right here on the New York Times. This author, I want you to know her name, Jennifer Zalai.

  10. 19:35

    She published this opinion piece in New York Times titled, The Constitution is sacred. Is it also dangerous? Is it also dangerous? And so I'm going to just give you my opening thesis of this right now. When you find this, usually what is happening is opposition to the US Constitution simply is being provided as pretext for people who favor totalitarianism. That's when it gets right down to it. We you can you can use a lot of big words. You can go through a lot of verbiage. But when it comes right down to it, the thing that frustrates them most is one, the separation of powers. You know, it bothers them tremendously. That power is not concentrated in one Pulitzer Bureau. The other thing that they hate is that it's so hard to change it. They hate it. They hate it. And I'm going to give you an example of what I mean. And this article, it is so, it's flawed at its foundation. Its musings are inconsistent because things that they're offering as proof positive of their thesis and the piece, they contradict in the same piece. You know what I'm gonna talk about? Like for example, it gets to one part where they say, it's so hard to change it. And then they go to a place talking about, yeah. But there was a time we had lots of change all at one time. And so, just because it's harder to change doesn't mean it's impossible, but there's a reason. And this is what I want to say, not just my overarching thesis that constitutional opposition usually is a mask for totalitarianism preference, totalitarian preference. I also want you to understand, and most of you who are listening to me right now, you do understand this. The inescapable reality is worldview, you cannot sidestep worldview.

  11. 21:39

    You're gonna always come back down to worldview. And usually the people who are opponents the US Constitution or become opponents of the US Constitution, they deny a core fundamental of humanity. They deny that the people that are advocates for humanistic utopia, they deny a core reality that is intrinsic to all humankind and simply it's man's fallenness, but they deny that. So let's get into it. The title of this piece is a Constitution is Sacred. Is it also dangerous written by Jennifer Zalai at the New York Times? So they Jennifer Zalai pits this broad side against the US Constitution using their favorite contemporary boogie man, John, Mr. 45th president of the United States candidate to become the 47th president of the United States, Donald John Trump. pick up. Is no surprise then, I'm quoting from the piece, that liberals charged Trump, Trump with being a menace to the Constitution, but his presidency and the prospect of his reelection have also generated another very different argument that Trump owes his political assent to the Constitution, making him a beneficiary of a document that is essentially anti-democratic and this day and age increasingly dysfunctional. I'm going to pause, in quote. So this author is describing the US Constitution as anti-democratic. This is such a foolish, foolish statement because the Constitution clearly provides for democratic features, meaning popular participation. The only thing is that popular participation does not, is not found fundamentally and ultimately determinative because you have to go back.

  12. 23:40

    And this is why, and it is funny, because right now I'm teaching a civics class to homeschoolers that really is a combination of basic civics, a government with a particular focus on American government and introduction to constitutional law, all in one course. This is why we must have a conversant and intelligent populace. This is why the founders wrote the Constitution at a level to be consumed by all Americans, just from law students in their in their law schools, not for ivory towers. This was supposed to be a document that was supposed to be daily regular conversation piece. For everyday American citizens. That is what that is what it's supposed to be. I encourage people all the time. I have right here in this one little small pocket Constitution. I had the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution itself, every article and all of its amendments, George Washington's farewell address, as well as the sign of the Constitution, all in this one little, it's not, it doesn't take a long time to read. All right, getting back to this. To say the US Constitution is anti-democratic, you can use words if you want to, but it just shows you don't understand. Because you have to go all the way back to what is the basis of the Constitution? Well, since you asked, the basis of the Constitution goes back to some of the enduring and foundational contributing opponents, go back to 1520, the Make-Flower Compact, where we get the notion of the social contract, well, what is the social contract? The social contract stands for the notion that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Consent. So to make this very, very plain to you, there would be no US Constitution unless there was a ratifying process to where the citizens agreed to be governed by the US Constitution. The fact that there is a Constitution and that it exists is evidence proof positive, that it is the exact opposite of anti-democratic.

  13. 25:46

    All right, leave that alone for a moment. Back to this article. And I'm just walking through this because I want everybody to be able to converse well on this topic, back to the piece. Quote, after all, Trump became president in 2016 after losing the popular vote, but winning the Electoral College, article three. He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court, Article 3, two of whom were confirmed by Senators representing just 44% of the population, Article 1. Those three justices helped overturn Roe versus Wade. A reversal, I'm sorry, I'll overturn Roe versus Wade. I'm going to stop the quote right there. All right. Yes. Article 3 of the US Constitution creates the Electoral College because the key to the Republican form of government guaranteed by Article 4, and we not only have a Republican form of government, we have a constitutional Republican form of government that we have a representative Democratic participation. And that representative Democratic participation must comply with the objective standard articulated in the U.S. Constitution. But the representatives who participate only get to participate because of the Democratic involvement of their constituency. It's not anti-democratic. It simply employs a diffusion of power because you've heard this maxim, power corrupts, absolute power corrupts, absolutely. The fundamental worldview notion that undergirds it is the binding element. You know, if you got a KitKat, you know, the gooey stuff in between the wafers, the binding element, the GUI stuff in between the wafers is the foundest understanding of mankind's fallenness and is pinching towards the gravity. That is why they didn't want a concentration of power. We need to diffuse this power. All right. And it's so amazing to me. Right. So they want to talk about, you know, the article three power and then the appointment of Supreme Court justices article three, yes, two of whom were confirmed by senators and they they committed contributed to Roe vs. Wade being overturned.

  14. 28:08

    You know what she didn't point out? What percentage of them participated in Roe vs. Wade being passed in the first place? See these people had no problem with the Supreme Court. You know, from about the 1940s, from FDR's term, all the way up until just really about, you know, Brett Kavanaugh, they have any problem with it then, but they have problems with it now. Why? because this is pretext for their preference for totalitarianism. This is no different than a baby that's one of the retimpantium when you tell them you can't eat a lollipop for breakfast. They're crying because it's just though it's not going their way for now. And so as true to totalitarian if they're not getting their way, they want to find a way to force their way. So then, oh man, this show is going too fast. Then Jennifer Zilai turns to the well regarded constitutional scholar, Dr. Erwin Chimerinsky, renowned constitutional law scholar, dean of UC Berkeley's law school. She quotes Erwin Chimerinsky, quote, the eminent legal scholar Erwin Chimerinsky worried about opinion polls showing a dramatic loss of faith in democracy, writing in his new book, No Democracy last forever. According to Dr. Jim Wrensky, it is important for Americans to see that these failures stem from the Constitution itself. Dr. Wrensky is saying the problem we have in America, you see, is the Constitution. Now this is rich for a number of reasons. First, this is a little inside information. You want to know who authored my textbook in law school for my Constitutional Law class? Our Constitution law textbook, that was about 3 1-1-2 inches thick, or Wanchi Merensky.

  15. 30:10

    Y'all want to know what was in my Constitution law textbook? That 3 1-2 inches thick was all case law. Well, hey, where is the US Constitution? I'm so glad you asked. The US Constitution was made a pocket part to my con law textbook. You can quote me on this and repeat this all over the country. The US Constitution was never assigned reading from our constitutional law class in law school. You know what was a sign reading three and a half inches of judicial opinions So you have to excuse me if I'm not surprised that renowned Constitution law scholar or when Jim Rinsky that necessarily see too much importance of the Constitution because I would think you know You think the Constitution is important. You're probably making a part of the body of your book And why am I pointing this out see what a lot of people don't realize is that our historical pro-Cid-U.S. Constitution was through a back-Black-Stonian ethic that won, did this amazing thing that actually studied the text of the Constitution, studied the debates of the founders that went into the crafting and drafting of the articles that studied the debates between the Federalists and the anti-Federalists that resulted in the Constitution's ratification not transpiring until there was a bill of rights created. And that the American populace demanded, you know, this thing that they're calling anti-democratic, the ratification did not occur because the American citizens demand it, the articles have drafted give too much potency to the national or federal government. We need to have individual assurances for the individual citizens and the individual liberty and for the liberty of the states in order for us to feel confident and comfortable with this document. But something happened. And this is why we have to understand culture is important because with the ascendance of Darwinian worldview with his initial work on origin of the species by means of natural selection in the struggle of the preservation of favored racists. That's the full title of his book.

  16. 32:18

    To where he applied his macro evolutionary theory to the animal kingdom first, and then 11 years later, he applied it to mankind in his descent of man offering. His offering became so popular that it affected every sector of society, including Americans, American society, reaching all the way into the formation of our legal system, to where lawyers and judges or ultimately turned away from a Black stonian approach to our Constitution and embrace what's called legal positivism. What is the thrust of legal positivism? Well, human beings are smarter. Later, if it's older, it must be less complex, less intelligent, and the only things that are worth retaining are the things that are recent. So we don't even know any of our history. It is whatever we determine it to be right now. 10 Laws.us. The Hamilton Quarter Podcast and One-Minute Commentaries are available at EFR.net. Back to the Hamilton Quarter on American Family Radio. Welcome back to the Hamilton Corner, man. I'm way off schedule. This legal positivism is what gave rise to the refrain that began to be used. The Constitution is a living document. What did they mean by that? The words on the page don't matter.

  17. 34:20

    The words in the document don't matter. We need to fit it to modern times. This is why you have people like, again, renowned legal scholar, now retired from the US Circuit, US Seven Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Richard Posner, who infamously stated, quote, I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, days, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution. The history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation. 18th century guys, however smart, could not receive the culture, technology, etc. of the 21st century, which means that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post-Civil War amendments, including the 14th Amendment, do not speak to today. The Constitution is a living, breathing document. It is what we judges say it is. In quote, Judge Richard Posner for you folks. Now he tried to come back after the fact with some, you know, Milly mouth apology. Oh, I like that. Why that's not what I say. You meant what you said, man. Because he still tried to adhere to his philosophical approach, living document philosophical approach. But that's where this comes from. And with these guys, people who advocate for this position, what they simply mean is that they don't want to be governed by the constitution back to this piece in Dr. Chimerinsky. So Jin Zalai, after I have to keep turning to make sure I get it, get her name, she goes back to her article, quote, back in 2018, Chimerinsky, the Dean of Berkeley's Law School still seemed to place considerable faith in the Constitution, pleading with fellow progressives in his book, We The People, not to turn their back on the Constitution in the courts. By contrast, in his new book, No Democracy Last Forever, his position is markedly pessimistic, asserting that the Constitution, which is famously difficult to amend, has put the country in grave danger.

  18. 36:27

    End quote. I did not tell you what are the things that they hate about it. Is that it's hard to change it? Did not tell you that. Did not tell you that. One of the things that they hate about the Constitution is that it's hard to change it. Why do you think they hate that it's hard to change? And again, you will never be able to escape worldview. If you have a worldview that man has fallen and that is depravity is inevitable, then you would want what? Defuse power, separate the power, make it very difficult to change the Constitution. Not impossible. It can be changed, but in order for it to be changed, the people advocating for its change are going to have to do an amazing job persuading their fellow citizens. That's what our Constitution requires. We have mechanisms provided within the Constitution to change it. We just have to comply with that in order to change it. When you consider this is one of the things I talked about our civic students about, how many people have to be involved at the federal level in order to make law? Notice I said law, not in executive order, not in administrative edict law, which comes to Congress. How many members of the congressional branch are there? Yeah, 435 members of the US House of Representatives. You have 100 US senators to for every state. And you have a president that has veto power. It by design requires 536 people to participate in the process of making a law. Do you think the founders intended for lawmaking to be something that was to happen with the snap of a finger? No, why again? You cannot escape world view Now, if you come from the other perspective, then men are inherently angels, and men were angels, but there would be no need of government.

  19. 38:41

    So the fact that we acknowledge we need some government kind of affirms a notion that men have the capacity to do some heinous things to each other. And here's the other thing, that a lot of these people conveniently forget the founders never envisioned a United States of America with the most dominant source of governmental involvement in the day to day lives of American citizens would be the federal government. See, one or the other major foundational observations from this Republican form of government is that the government closest to you was always designed to be the most involved in your daily lives. So these are considerations that people like Gen Zalai, some of us have a spell are named Z, I'm sorry, S-Z-A-L-A-I, that's how you spell our last name. That was intentional. because the federal or national government was meant to be a feature of American life, not the feature of American life. Then Gen Zilai goes back to Ermett Cemorinsky in her piece. Quote, Cemorinsky lays out what would need to happen for a new constitutional convention. And in the book's more somber moments, he entertains the possibility of secession. West Coast states might form a nation called Pacifica. I can't quite have heard this before. But of course, of course. He hopes, however, that any divorce, if it comes, would be peaceful. Sure. Sure. Dr. Jim Arensky, who also, by the way, is Jewish, who was shocked that there were so many anti-Semites on UC Berkeley's campus. Really?

  20. 40:46

    Since the lie goes on. The anguish is in some sense a flip side of veneration. Americans have long assumed that the Constitution could save us. A growing chorus now wonders whether we need to be saved from it." So again, what are the sum of the features? They hate this separation of powers. They hate the fact that it takes a long time to change it. Why? Because they want consolidation of powers and they want these consolidated powers to be the emergency responders to every issue of the American citizenry. While one of the enduring features of the Republican form of government, the constitutional framework that the found is established is that there will be a separation of powers that the government closest to us will be the ones most directly involved in our everyday lives. And because we recognize that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, we want government to remain small, small, small, and this cannot be achieved with the current constitutional structure. In a word, some people want to be unburton from what has been. Oh, my goodness. She goes on to describe Dr. Chimerinsky's perspective. Quote, as Chimerinsky puts it, this distrust of democracy embedded in the rest of the constitutional document reflects the framers' inability to conceive of a future where there was change. Now I mentioned to you that they said they hate that it could be changed but then on page five of the same article, they're going to know, oh yeah, by the way, there were changes. The way the US senators have been elected have been changed and women were granted the right to vote. But I thought you said it can't be changed. It can be changed. But see, when they say change, this is what they mean.

  21. 42:48

    And this is this is why I'm having this exercise with you. They don't mean actually changing the law. What they mean when they say change, they mean their ability to impose their will on their fellow citizens without the need to appeal to their fellow citizens. See the changes that the same article observes, which is what I'm saying. She contradicts herself in the same piece. On one hand, you can't change it. On other hand, you can change it. What's the point is it? No, the change that you want, you want quick changes that do not require you to appeal to your fellow citizen. That's what you don't want. You don't want to have the reason with people to get ratification in super majorities. You don't want to have to persuade people, you want to be able to impose your will. One of those kind of like, well, you know, you got a pass to be able to see what's in it. Never heard that before. Extrapolate that and extend that to like times a million. Do you realize FDR saw himself with his New Deal policies attempting to establish an American version? Again, of centralized government? That's what he saw. And to these regressive, FDR is like a paragon of virtue. They love him. Zanzaliah then goes on to object to originalism. She goes on to say, after observing, well, yeah, there were some changes. But for the last 50 years, but quote, for the last 50 years, the Constitution has appeared frozen in amber in quote. Yeah, if if they're not policy prerogatives that first of all rise to the level of constitutional importance, secondarily that have the support of the consent of the governed, it doesn't need to be changed. But again, often this objection to the Constitution is really just a pretext for totalitarianism.

  22. 44:51

    And then she starts to take the mask off even more and try to use scholars to justify it. I'm now on page six of her article, quote, "'The attorney and columnist Mediba K. Denny argues that originalist can a use of apolitical language ensnares liberals into treating originalism as coherent jurisprudence. even when it functions more like in ideology. Far from encouraging judicial restraint, she writes in the originalism trap, originalism is much more effective in restraining judges from doing good things in quote. You see, you see the issue that they have, their objection to the Constitution is a pretext for totalitarianism. She doesn't want judges to be restrained to adhere, to protect and defend the Constitution, she wants judges to do good things, which should cause every American citizen to say, by what standard do you use the term good? Because when she calls good things, may not necessarily be what you would call a good thing, but she nevertheless wants judges to be able to do the good thing because, say it with me, because the desire is totalitarianism. The only people who object to the constitutional structure are those who want to impose their will. They're frustrated by not being enough to have slim, simple majorities. No, because one of the features that the founders understood is that because a man's fickle heart, it ebbs and flows. And just by the way, for those who've never heard these things before, the founding fathers scoured the globe for all founds of types and forms of government and landed on a Constitution Republic because they recognize a few things. Let's go with Fisher Ames. We'll start there. Fisher Ames, who was a delegate to the ratifying convention for Massachusetts.

  23. 46:51

    All right? He said this quote, a democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way. Halabensman Rush, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, he says quote, a simple democracy or an absolute democracy is the devil's own government. quote, see the founding fathers were fleeing a monarchial tyranny. And they said in their debates, we don't want to exchange a tyranny of a king for a tyranny of the 51%. So we need to diffuse power that will require our citizens to reason one another in order before, in order for governmental wins to shift. John Adams, second president of the United States said this, quote, remember democracy never lasts long. as soon wastes exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. Noor Webster quote, in democracy, there are commonly two moats and disorders. Therefore, a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth. End quote. You have John Witherspoon, first early dean of the University of New Jersey at Princeton, who became Princeton University. Don Witherspoon said this, pure democracy cannot subsist long, nor be carried for, sorry, cannot subsist long, nor be carried far into the departments of state. It is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage." End quote. This is why the founders rejected the notion of a simple democracy, tearing it up to 51%, in exchange for a constitutional Republican form of government with democratic features. Defuse a separate power, okay? Decentralize it, allow the people to elect representatives who are literally tasked with re-presenting this.

  24. 48:57

    This literally was the government that was employed to replace the articles of Confederation. So again, I want you to be aware of this. The founders rejected the democracy and you only really have to go to our Pledge of Allegiance which says we pledge allegiance to the Republic for which it stands because they understood An absolute democracy is nothing more than mobocracy. The views and opinions expressed in this broadcast may not necessarily reflect those of the American Family Association or American Family Radio.

Subscribe and never miss an episode.

Pick your platform All Episodes
Latest episode Book Abe