The Holy
Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are the
inseparable Godhead and the removal of any one
diminishes the remaining two. Such is also the case
with the American trinity, the Declaration of
Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of
Rights; negating even one renders the others
meaningless, something which is purposely being done
today. Let me explain.
In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson
succinctly defined our unique American experiment in
a single page. With the lone exception of Jesus
Christ, never before, nor since, would the simple
words of one man have such an impact on all of
humanity. Here are Jefferson’s points: First, he
acknowledges the existence of God in whose eyes all
men are created equal. Second, because our Creator
endowed us with rights to life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness they are so much a part of our
soul they cannot be surrendered, nor taken away.
Third, Jefferson defines government’s only function
is to secure those rights and then only upon
receiving the permission from the governed.
Thirteen years later, the framers of our
Constitution composed the ground rules implementing
Jefferson’s principles, thus forming the second
entity in the American trinity. Worried a system
large enough to secure rights might become
tyrannical; the framers purposely limited the
federal government to the powers expressed in
Article 1, Section 8.
After two years, these same framers composed the
Bill of Rights, the third and final masterpiece of
the American trinity further limiting the power of
the federal government. The “First Amendment” sets
the tone for the other nine by declaring “Congress
shall pass no law…” Similarly, the “Second
Amendment” does not grant fundamental rights of
self-preservation, rather it restricts government
from infringing on rights endowed by our Creator.
Because our lives belong to God, we have the
fundamental right to preserve our lives and liberty
plus the lives and liberty of others. This point is
critical and many Americans misunderstand this
principle. If our rights came from the Constitution,
a simple vote of the people, legislators, or
executive order could amend them away.
Frighteningly, this is being done today.
The federal government is proposing to regulate the
loading mechanism, magazine capacity, and visual
appearance of firearms and this is a blatant
unconstitutional infringement. More than just our
right as state legislators to call the federal
government into question, it is our obligation to do
so. So I did. Tuesday, February 12th, I presented
HB320 before the House Judiciary Committee. This
bill would prohibit state personnel and funds from
being used to enforce an unconstitutional federal
ban on semiautomatic weapons and high capacity
magazines. The opposition was fierce. HB302 was
voted out of committee 12-8, entirely along party
lines with no support from even one Democrat. As you
read this, the battle has moved to the Montana House
Floor where the outcome is yet to be determined.
Nullifying unconstitutional law should be a
bipartisan task, but it is not and here is why:
Advocates for a massive, central government have
convinced sportsmen the right to keep and bear arms
is actually about access to public lands and they
assure voters no government official wishes to
confiscate shotguns or hunting rifles. Without
thinking, voters rally for bigger government never
considering a government big enough to give you all
you want is big enough to take from you all you
have. If government intentions were honorable, why
would George Mason, one of the framers of both our
Constitution and Bill of Rights say, “To disarm the
people is the best and most effectual way to enslave
them.” Did he see this coming?
|