In light of this scary sea-change in the American Body Politic, I decided to use this blogpost to reassert the Rights that we
have as Americans – rights that we have (or SHOULD have), even when government disagrees….and
especially when a majority of the American Citizens disagree.
The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to protect
citizens against government…and to protect minorities against the majority.
Amendment I …Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
No
Official Religion, folks. I don’t want Congressmen and Senators basing laws on their understanding of the teachings of the Bible, the Torah, Confucius, Mohammed, Lao
Tzu, Vishna or Haile Selassie. We are a
secular nation – not a theocracy. Religious
teaching must NOT be the basis for any American Law. One religious set of beliefs must not be 'preserved' by the State.
…or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof…..
Yes, we
are allowed to believe the most mundane – or the oddest things – in our religious
life. My church marries gays – too bad
if you don't like it. Some are highly
structured and liturgical, some operate like camp meetings, some appear to be
college lectures. We have the RIGHT to believe, AND TO EXERCISE our religion - even
in public. If a Muslim wants to pray on a
rug in public, or a Sikh feels compelled to wear a turban, or a Christian insists on wearing ashes on Ash Wednesday to work, or a Jewish man insists on wearing a yarmulke through a TSA checkpoint, or four
wives freely choose to submit to one husband and wear prairie dresses…that’s
their business. They have a RIGHT to be
different, a RIGHT to be a minority in a diverse, secular nation.
…. or abridging the freedom
of speech…
We have a right to voice
our opinions, no matter how objectionable, disgusting, counter-culture, or
inflammatory they may be. (And that includes 'symbolic speech' as well as the spoken word.) Ours was a nation
that believed in ALLOWING the free flow of ideas and discourse, in the hopes
that the marketplace of ideas would sift through the crap.
You don’t like “hate
speech,” or Westboro Baptist protests, or talk-show hosts spewing the craziest
of dishonest tales? Neither do I. The response is for a free people to respond
with speech of their own – not to use the police power of the state to stifle opinions
with which they disagree. (And please, don’t resort to that old, “What about
shouting-fire-in-a-theater?” crap. That
phrase was used to justify the jailing a draft protester…and was overturned by
a subsequent court decision).
“ or of the press…”
The Press includes more
than a NY Times reporter with a press pass; it includes every blogger on their
laptop, every Tweeter on their iPhone, and every citizen on their Android. I have a right to film police and other
public servants in the course of their duties, without obtaining permission or
being threatened with arrest...and to report what I have found without being branded a 'terrorist' or troublemaker by the government that exists to serve me.
“… or the right of the
people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of
grievances.”
Notice it doesn’t say, “As
long as you protest here, or there, and have a permit, and insurance, and get
permission and clearance and pay for a police watch.” It says we have a RIGHT to assemble, to
protest, to petition our government – and that should not be accompanied by the
State ‘kettling’ protesters, or pepper-spraying, tear-gassing, or tazering the citizens while clad in riot gear.
A well regulated Militia,
being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to
keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This is not about
Hunting. It’s not entirely about
Self-Defense. And it’s definitely not about the
National Guard, or authorizing "regulation" (The word meant something entirely different when it was written). More than 220 years of
Constitutional history, as well as previous colonial history and state parallels, make
one thing very clear: the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to permit
the People to Arm themselves against Their Government. No, we probably will not prevail in an all-out insurrection...but the Right is not meant to be a guarantee that we will prevail
against our government, just as freedom of speech doesn't mean you
will win the support of the majority…but it does exist to help the People fight their own
Police, a right, if exercised, which may have resulted in different results for
the Lakhota Sioux at Wounded Knee, the
Jews in the Warsaw ghetto, interned
Japanese-American citizens, and countless others who saw ‘legitimate’
governments turn to tyranny under the excuse of "national security."
Yes, we have a right to
semi-automatic and automatic rifles. No,
we don't need ‘permission’ or registration to exercise a right.
The right of the people to
be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable
searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but
upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
No, Officer, you do not
have a right to shove a sobriety test in my face for no reason, or to ask me
where I’m going and where I’ve been. No,
Mr. Homeland Security Bureaucrat, you do not have a right to examine my bank
transactions or Library selections. No, Mr. Sheriff, you do not have a right to walk through 400
homes in search of a fugitive, and No, you do not have a right to search
thousands of properties with drones without a warrant.
We have the right to be
secure. In our banking. In our
doctor-patient relationships. In who and
how we love. In how we enjoy a party. In
what we download or repost from the Internet. It’s none of the Government’s
damned business unless there's "probable cause" for a criminal charge.
No person …. shall be
deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall
private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Mr. President, your
Death-by-Drone attacks against United States citizens is a flagrant violation
of this amendment, as is the IRS confiscating the assets of accused (not
convicted) drug dealers, and the Supreme-Court ‘approved’ taking of private
property (New London vs. Kelo) for *private* use.
In all criminal
prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,
by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have
been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law,
and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted
with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining
witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The detainment of Human
Beings in prison camps conveniently arranged on foreign soil, without charge,
or trial, or the ability to confront witnesses, and the state-sponsored censorship of their own attorney's documents, is an unconscionable violation
of this clause. Guantanamo Bay must SHUT
DOWN.
Excessive bail shall not be
required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments
inflicted.
Waterboarding. The forced, naked isolation of Bradley
Manning in a frigid stone cell. The Destruction of families, livelihoods, and
neighborhoods via 20 and 30 year federal sentences for mere drug possession. The Jailing of HIV Positive men for having
sex (*after* divulging their status, and with the consent of the other adult,
and without transmitting any virus), with sentences longer than those given for
murder in Iowa.
The powers not delegated to
the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are
reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
And fortunately, there are
other identified rights which have been added by amendment, or developed based on these first ten: the right to privacy; freedom of association; to travel unhindered; to
equal protection before the law regardless of race; for women to vote on an
equal basis with men; for home education; for Jury Nullification.
The history of our nation
has been one of expanding rights, not restricting them…but based on what I hear
the current generation saying and writing, they would toss many of those rights
out the window without a second thought…all because it doesnt seem to affect ‘them.’
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment