"Our" Constitution Was Made Only for a Moral and Religious People
However those in positions of authority—have abandoned the Founders’ belief.
(Anyone who reads my stacks will note that some I write, actually the majority of them I write from research I do, and some are from other sources because what I find I can’t really do a better job with the information provided. This is one of those articles from Hillsdale College. What can I add? I am sure some will agree, some will disagree, I for one wouldn’t have posted this if I disagreed. For the original article click this Hillsdale College link. C.L.)
On October 11, 1798, John Adams wrote to the Massachusetts Militia that
Because We have no Government armed with Power capable of contending with human Passions unbridled by morality and Religion. Avarice, Ambition, Revenge or Gallantry, would break the strongest Cords of our Constitution as a Whale goes through a Net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
But are we still a moral and religious people? In “The Real American Founding: A Conversation,” professors of politics David Azerrad and Thomas West help us answer that question.
In the fifth lecture of that course, titled “Morality and Virtue,” professors Azerrad and West discuss the fact that government always legislates morality, but what that morality consists of depends on the beliefs of those who make the laws. The nature of the legislative power is to tell people what they can and cannot do, what is right and wrong.
In the Founders’ understanding, they believed that government ought to support true morality and virtue. That is, morality and virtue grounded in the laws of nature and of nature’s God, from which they derived man’s natural rights and duties.
The Founders also believed that the laws of nature and of nature’s God, along with the natural rights and duties derived from them, were in accord with their Christian beliefs. Government therefore ought not to be hostile to Christianity, but rather should support it with laws that are friendly to it and encourage its flourishing among the citizenry.
For example, in Washington’s Farewell Address, he advises that
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
Without those great pillars of human happiness—religion and morality, with the former supporting the latter—the courts of justice become a sham because oaths cannot be trusted. Property, reputation, and life will not be protected.
Washington therefore warns us to be on our guard against those who “should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness.” Have we heeded his warning?
Professor Azerrad points out that America’s “elites”—those in positions of authority—have abandoned the Founders’ belief that Christianity ought to be encouraged to flourish in America. He observes that
the consensus elite view is that religion—and Christianity in particular—is dangerous. You shouldn’t talk about it; you shouldn’t subsidize it. Whereas the secular religions of the age—feminism, critical race theory, sexual liberation, transgenderism—they get subsidized, promoted, pushed everywhere.
Professor West agrees and observes that the change “didn’t really happen until post-World War II. And the reason why is because those in positions of authority now have a different understanding of justice and morality than the Founders.” According to Dr. West, the post-war “elite” no longer viewed the purpose of government as being to secure the rights of citizens:
They wanted to get people away from the idea that somehow or other property rights are to be respected and defended, in order to justify the new orientation towards property, which is redistribution—to governments, to groups that government designates as disadvantaged. And the same thing is true with regard to sex and sexual liberation. As that becomes more and more important to the elites of our society, in the ’40s and ’50s and ’60s, then Christianity came to be seen as the enemy. . . . “Thou shall not commit adultery.” It’s a principle that had to be overturned in order to justify the sexual revolution.
There is a stark contrast between the world we live in versus the one inhabited by the Founders, especially including the laws they implemented versus the ones we live under today. Our world has changed drastically, and in many cases, not for the better.
If we are no longer a moral and religious people, and if Adams was right, then do we still live under the same Constitution? Indeed, with the rise of Progressive, bureaucratic government, followed by the takeover by the radicals of the 1960s and their cultural Marxist ideology, it appears that our government has undergone a radical revolution. By not entirely and overtly discarding the parchment which contains our fundamental law, but rather keeping it under protective glass as a mere relic, the revolutionaries pulled off a clever coup by grasping authority under the guise of legitimacy. ~ By Brett Waite December 7, 2023
I, Courageous Lion, will end this with this letter from Edward Mandell House had this to say in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President, 1913-1921) From the private papers of Woodrow Wilson. Do you think this shows a moral compass in line with Christianity when you read this letter?
“[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They will be our Chattel and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two would figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor or to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner; every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.” ….
What do you think? I think that if you were to get a copy of Fruit From a Poisonous Tree and read it, you will really see how messed up the whole system has become since the war for Southern Independence. Please do so…This is a link to the book:
Moral and religious people - Another way of saying people who live in love not fear. To live in love is to " Do unto others as you would have them do unto you ". To live in fear is not that.
We live on a Planet that has been run on fear, for the most part and is being run on fear. So the language of fear - hate, judgement, anger, lust, greed, envy, lying, deceit, war, etc......... is the language of this Planet, not the language of love - closeness, acceptance, honesty, truth, cooperation, etc.....
The Constitution is an attempt at using the language of love, an attempt to give something else rather than fear as a way to live on this planet.......
Problem is, the people who love power and money - those who live in fear - are the ones who rise to the top and so the Constitution is attacked and made worthless, since it is a roadblock to what the end goal is of these "achievers " - To have absolute power and control over all. ( The sure way to be feared and not to be afraid. )
So, the solution, the basic problem that needs to be solved is for people to start living in love, not fear. Going after any other symptom or group of symptoms is not a solution but a masking of the real cause of all our problems - living in fear.
Thank you for an outstanding article. I personally, am a member and donor to Hillsdale College.
Blessings ~