Some thoughts on Rights...

I was mulling over the 'Bill of Rights' and something came to me that I think is quite profound. These are rights (I can hear you saying 'Doh' - stick with me here)! How would you answer me if I asked you the following question:

"If tomorrow there were no first amendment to the constitution, would we, as individuals, still consider that we had a 'right' to free speech, free religion and free assembly?"

I think the answer is a resounding YES! Americans believe that these are ultimately inalienable rights that come from some place greater than ourselves (to some, God; to some, maybe just because we exist). This is so basic that it seems infantile to even discuss it, but there are some very important ideas embodied in this concept:

1. The Constitution and its amendments are there ONLY to limit government.
2. The only reason ANY of this needs to be written down and codified into law is that GOVERNMENTS have an irritating habit of becoming destructive of the rights of their citizens.

The truth of all of this is that freedom is a HUMAN right, whether of religion, ownership of firearms, speech, assembly or whatever. Therefore, when our president makes a comment that the Constitution is a list of 'negative rights', your skin should crawl. In essence, he's saying that the constitution is establishing the LIMITS on the freedoms we have and that the reason we have those freedoms is because the Constitution says so. When the 2nd amendment says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms in support of a well-regulated militia shall not be infringed, those who believe that the Constitution is a document of 'negative rights' would say that the militia is the ONLY reason that there should be gun ownership. If the government decides that something is not a militia, then the people don't have the right. Any other reason to own firearms could be construed to be counter to the constitution. We are getting pulled into the wrong side of the argument when we have to defend our 'right' to gun ownership. It's a right. End of story (I know; it's not that simple, but it should be). It's not forbidden in the founding documents of our society, and those documents make it clear that, in the case of the United States, those rights come from a benevolent and loving God, not from man or any of his constructs. Therefore, if we agree to continue to be citizens of this nation, we are agreeing that the design of our nation is that, from the perspective of the United States we are all born free with certain inalienable rights given by God and not by man and that our government is limited, not our people.

It's easy to get drawn into the other side's debate about things like what the Constitution says and doesn't say. The reality is that when you get right down to it, the only reason that the Constitution even matters and exists is to prevent the government from infringing on the rights that we already have. The PEOPLE don't really need a constitution to exist except as protection. The government does. The preamble to the Constitution clearly lays out the entire purpose of the Constitution. It was "...ordain(ed) and establish(ed)" to set the rules by which the government interacts with its citizens, not the other way around. Laws within the framework of the Constitution are instituted among men to maintain order and punish those who stray outside of the lines our society and God have established. But the Constitution is specifically to limit government. In the case of the bill of rights, it was to even further limit and define government's role. Have you ever read this line: "THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will worst ensure the beneficent starts of its institution". Me either. This is the introduction to the Bill of Rights saying that these amendments were to restrict our government even more!

So here's the meat: This means that from the perspective of the citizen, there should NEVER be a question of what our freedoms and rights are. They just are. The only entity that requires reminding is the government. The 2nd amendment doesn't, as most people believe, GIVE you the right to bear arms. It prevents the government from deciding you don't have the RIGHT to bear arms. That's a HUGE difference since we believe that we already have the RIGHT to bear arms. Believing that it gives you the right means you believe that the Constitution is made up of negative rights. The first amendment does NOT say that it's ok for us to establish and exercise our religious preferences and have a free press. It says that the GOVERNMENT can't take that right away from us or even infringe on it. The difference is subtle, but makes all the difference in a free society. We've somehow managed to come to believe that the argument from the other side has merit enough for us to have to defend THEIR definition of our rights. This is insidious and destructive. If we GIVE the government the authority to decide what rights we have, then the Constitution becomes our jail cell, and the government our jailer, doling out freedoms to those they deem worthy.

The only way that we are truly free is by electing those who would agree with the stance that we already have the rights, not that they are there to define those rights, and who will appoint judges who also agree with this stand. When I was a kid, there was a song that played on the radio called, "Helen Wheels". They actually printed that name on the label. The words of the song were ACTUALLY "Hell on Wheels", but at that time, it wasn't allowed to say the word 'Hell' on the radio except maybe as part of a sermon being broadcast from a church. The camel is now nearly fully in the tent - very few words are not allowed on radio, and we have been desensitized to hearing them. The same is true of the freedoms we inherited. While we can still drive around and go out to eat and go to church and congregate, we now need 'permits' to have a regular church meeting in a house, or a protest march or to 'finish' part of a basement in a house that we own. We require a child's lemonade stand to pay taxes and in some places, again to get permits. We are forced to pay taxes to support things (abortion for example) that we don't believe in, that should never have been done at the government level in the first place. Overflowing septic systems are deemed 'wetlands' forcing homeowners to not fix the problems. Housing subdivisions frequently won't allow the display of the American flag. These things have been done in the name of protecting and serving the people, but each tiny item whittles away the freedom to own something, make it your own and build it into something you can be proud of.

The same is happening to our Constitution. Thankfully, we are still (for now) free to stand up for it!