For centuries, our American forefathers fought for individual liberty, traditional morality, and a just government. Now, we are losing all three.
The Federalist No. 51 adroitly addresses the paradox of human liberty: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.”
Therein lies the rub. Human beings – being human beings – desire liberty for themselves but succumb to the temptations of ruling tyrannically over others. Hence, our Founding Fathers deliberate framing of a government divided among three branches (executive, legislative, judicial), geographically (federal, state, local), and otherwise.
Now, we live in the worst of both worlds.
The human temptation to exceed boundaries has proceeded apace for generations and has finally succeeded in tearing down those limitations on government, empowering the government to place unlimited limitations upon the People.
This political role reversal has been accompanied by a similar reversal morally and spiritually.
Alexis de Tocqueville observed: “America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” Rather than be good, Americans have chosen – or had foisted upon them – a government which enjoins non-traditional immorality and proclaims itself the arbiter of the People’s will, irrespective of the People’s actual interests.
Regarding the exaltation of gay marriage, David French observes, “This is the era of sexual liberty – the marriage of hedonism to meaning – and the establishment of a new civic religion. The black-robed priesthood has spoken. Will the church bow before their new masters?”
We now have a culture without restraints and a government without restraints!
The remainder of this column addresses the impact of recent Supreme Court decisions which, perhaps inalterably, will transform the lives of every American. Here are some highlights for your consideration:
“Roberts’s denial that the Court legislates is astonishing in its cynicism: In saving SCOTUScare, the chief justice not only usurped Congress’s law-writing role with gusto; he claimed the powers, first, to divine legislative purpose from its contradictory expression in legislative language, and, then, to manufacture legislative ambiguity as the pretext for twisting the language to serve the contrived purpose.”
“Already, an ocean of ink has been spilled analyzing, lauding, and bemoaning the Supreme Court’s work this week: a second life line tossed to SCOTUScare in just three years; the location of a heretofore unknown constitutional right to same-sex marriage almost a century-and-a-half after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment; and the refashioning of Congress’s Fair Housing Act to embrace legal academe’s loopy ‘disparate impact’ theory of inducing discrimination.”
“And it is not so much that they [the liberal justices] move in lockstep. It is that no one expects them to do anything but move in lockstep – not their fellow justices, not the political branches, and certainly not the commentariat, right or left.”
“In the matter of the so-called Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court ruled that the law must not say what it in fact does say because it would be better if it were not to say what it says and were to say something else instead. In the matter of same-sex marriage, the Supreme Court rules that the law must say what it does not say because it would be better if it were to say what it does not say instead of what it says. Which is to say, the Supreme Court has firmly established that it does not matter what the law says or does not say – what matters is what they want.”
“The day after declaring Obamacare magically rewritten and that the lawsuits against discrimination in housing require no proof of actual discrimination, the Supreme Court found a unicorn in the 14th Amendment.”
“In the end, Kennedy’s case is simply that to be against same-sex marriage is bigotry: “It demeans gays and lesbians for the State to lock them out of a central institution of the Nation’s society.” With breathtaking arrogance, Kennedy concludes:”
“The limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples may long have seemed natural and just, but its inconsistency with the central meaning of the fundamental right to marry is now manifest.”
[Shapiro continues:] “For thousands of years, everybody got it wrong. For hundreds of years, every American state got it wrong. Today, the vast majority of the planet’s population gets it wrong, and so do hundreds of millions of Americans. But their wrongness is ‘manifest.’ Why? Because Kennedy says so.”
“But in the idolatry of the left, we do not have the freedom to govern ourselves, nor even to rely the old God for our values and truths. Our betters will lead us. And they will grant any right they see fit, and reject any liberty they see fit, and redefine any term they see fit. Democracy in America did not die with jackboots; it died with the boredom and stupidity of an American people complicit in its demise, celebrating the circuses and the games provided by its new rulers, fat and happy in their submission. Let the parades be held; let the call go forth. By the power vested in them by, well, them, the Supreme Court and the left declare Americans husbands and husbands, wives and wives – and all of them slaves.”
[John S. Roberts provides salient quotes from our Founders on liberty and tyranny.]