we the people; wake the "F" up

I’ve heard it said: Life is precious. Or is it? Because, in the current political atmosphere, it appears politically cheap to gain votes. And in the cycle of political life, votes beget power which begets strength, and strength begets control. Which brings up a conundrum of issues. And issues, whether real or imagined, allow those seeking power to gain the strength needed for control. Conversely, what constitutes life? Who controls it, and where does government have the power to dictate who lives or dies. Or, like the Old Testament days, when one wanted to worship a false god, they just threw their child on the burning pyre of sacrifice for the well-being of the one who did the throwing; doubly blessed with one less mouth to feed.

Well … the election’s over. Or is it? Apparently, some States have yet to finalize their counts for the House, so one part of the process has yet to be wrapped up. Which, if one can remove their political party blinders, should start to cast doubt on their State’s electoral abilities. Voting was the 5^th of November, and here it is the 11^th, with things still undecided. Sorry, but not being conspiratorial, should it really take this long? And I don’t give a damn if it’s Democrat or Republican, because I claim neither, believing both parties are the problem this nation faces. A two-faced coin, instead of two-headed. And to believe Harris and Trump, out of 330 million plus people were the best WE THE PEOPLE could muster? If that’s true, then God help us. But … He isn’t real, no?

Example: At one of Kamala’s rallies, an individual yelled: Jesus is Lord! And what were her words: “You’re at the wrong rally. Yours is down the street.” The individual was then summarily thrown out. So, yes, while the most ardent of liberals today do their dead level best to prove God’s fake, a figment of the imagination, in the Framers’ day, when the battles over how government was meant to be, the most ardent of liberals then: … before any human institutions of government were known in the world, there existed, if I may so express it, a compact between God and Man, from the beginning of time: and that as the relation and condition which man is his individual person stands in towards his Maker cannot be changed by any human laws or human authority, that religious devotion, which is a part of this compact, cannot so much as be made a subject of human laws; and that all laws must conform themselves to this prior existing compact, and not assume to make this compact conform to the laws, which, besides being human, are subsequent thereto. The first act of man, when he looked around and saw himself a creature which he did not make, and a world furnished for his reception, must have been devotion; and devotion must ever continue sacred to every individual man, as it appears right to him; and governments do mischief by interfering (Thomas Paine).

So, even though I believe God is real, I also understand the concept of government and religion, believing both are in the business of making money. And in the vein of similarity, the way they each make money is to take from and give to, while keeping for themselves what they believe becomes theirs. Ever wonder why some in the pulpit and those who legislate are wealthy, while those they “govern” are not? But, we’re not here for the semantics of God, but government, understanding the separation of church and state. Only, I’m always amazed at those whose demand said separation, but when it comes to proving a position, use religion to cement their case. Example: Abortion. It was the priority on the Democrat ticket this year: My Body; My Choice! Out of every issue facing the country, this was number one. The cartels control both sides of the southern border, every State has become a border State, and three years ago, “Tren de Aragua” had never been heard of in the States. Yet today, their control is growing. And WW III, a strong possibility. But abortion, on top of all the other issues facing the nation, is top priority. Seriously? Well, a few months back I had a conversation with an individual regarding the subject. And as such, I personally believe it is a constitutionally protected right … to a point. My antagonist though, during the discussion, brought up Judaism and how Jews do not believe life starts until after the baby has taken its first breath. The same individual who minutes before claimed separation of church and state, while using religion to satisfy their position.

Well, my perspective on the matter is sans religion (separation of church and state) even though I hold onto my faith: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (Declaration of Independence - DOI). But as in all things, words are important, including the ability to define them more so. Unalienable being key: cannot be taken away, making abortion and the transition from constitutional to unconstitutional, dependent on definitions:

Life: In a general sense, that state of animals and plants, or of an organized being, in which its natural functions and motions are performed, or in which its organs are capable of performing their functions. A tree is not destitute of life in winter, when the functions of its organs are suspended; nor man during a swoon or syncope; nor strictly birds, quadrupeds or serpents during their turpitude in winter. They are not strictly dead, till the functions of their organs are capable of being renewed. (2) In animals, animation; vitality; and in man, that state of being in which the soul and body are united. (4) The present state of existence; the time from birth to death. The life of man seldom exceeds seventy years (Webster’s 1828).

But there is complexity in simplicity. The DOI is not the Constitution, while the Constitution is the simplest, yet apparently, most complex form of government presented: self-determination, consisting of an Executive (President), Legislative (Congress), and Judicial (Courts) branches. Each distinct in power, structure, and purpose. Yet, the inclusion of evolution (even constitutional) has carried us from the Framers’ day to ours including medical advances that have allowed an achievement of things they never thought possible, complicating things. Which brings us back to the Constitution, its structure, and power, and who’s in control: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives (Article I/Section 1). So, again, word definition:

All: Every one, or the whole number of particulars. (2) The whole quantity, extent, duration, amount, quality or degree; as, all the wheat; all the land; all the year; all the strength. This word signifies then, the whole or entire thing, or all the parts or particulars which compose it. It always precedes the definitive adjectives, the, my, thy, his, our, your, their; as, all the cattle, all my labor, all thy goods; all his wealth; all our families; all your citizens; all their property. This word, not only in popular language, but in the scriptures, often signifies, indefinitely, a large portion or number, or a great part. Thus, all the cattle in Egypt died; all Judea and all the region about Jordan; all men held John as a prophet; are not to be understood in a literal sense, but as including a large part or very great numbers (Webster’s 1828). Oddly how these definitions transfer back to a biblical perspective, no? But I get it, God had to be killed off to give government godlike proportions. And in the power of “all legislative powers,” the definition of what the Constitution actually does becomes important to, and everyone should consider:

Constitution: The established form of government in a state, kingdom or country; a system of fundamental rules, principles and ordinances for the government (emphasis added) of a state or nation. In free states, the constitution is paramount to the statutes or laws enacted by the legislature, limiting and controlling its power (emphasis added); and in the United States, the legislature is created, and its powers designated (emphasis added), by the constitution (Webster’s 1828).

Forming, in the simplest of terms: The Constitution is a control of the government by the people, while allowing the government to have limited control of the people, and that every law written must find its roots in the document. In other words: The government cannot legislate what it cannot control. Which brings us to the Constitution, the powers granted to whom and who has control: provide for the … general Welfare (Article I/Section 8 - Congress). Thus, defining welfare: Exemption from misfortune, sickness, calamity, or evil; the enjoyment of health and the common blessings of life; prosperity; happiness; applied to persons (Webster’s 1828). Now, I get it, word definitions suck as we’re going in circles and is there any end to the repetition being presented? Well, person: An individual human being consisting of body and soul. We apply the word to beings only, possessed of a rational nature; the body when dead is not called a person. It is applied alike to a man, woman or child (Webster’s 1828).

So, with the advancement of medical technology, including the ability of a child to survive outside of the womb before natural birth, the conundrum of power becomes more important in the ability to decide another’s fate. And I get it: My Body; My Choice. But the problem I have with the concept: During Covid and all the fear mongering pushed, it was “I’m afraid: You submit,” with the forced acceptance of everyone taking “the jab.” Additionally, I recently saw a poll where fifty-three percent of the population wants the government more involved in their lives. To which I was stunned as our government was meant to be small, absent from our personal lives. Which makes me question where one wants control to start and stop. But understand, Congress does have the power to define when life is life or a person becomes a person, thus able to protect the child’s life who has No Voice; No Vote, against the one who wants to end it. Yet, during the campaign that point of distinction (limit on ability to) was never presented. Full term, or? So, if after Kamala overtly denounced God, and then later claimed God in the desire to gain votes, where does the constitutionality of protecting life start or the ability to destroy life end? And I get it; quite often I’d like to throw a few on the burning pyre of sacrifice allowing me the blessing of not having to deal with them. Their Body; My Choice, right? Because in the definition of person thereof: We apply the word to beings only, possessed of a rational nature – as I do not witness much rationality today, but more so cognitive dissonance. And conversely, the Framers’ also understood life at birth: The present state of existence; the time from birth to death; but birth now presents an ambiguity of reason, timeline, natural, medically induced or purpose for, and the ability of a child to survive. And before one throws out rape, complications, fetus viability, or mother’s safety, issues not related to freely obtaining abortions for birth control and who pays for it, full stop: Because when Susan Collins (R - Maine) claimed Roe v. Wade was settled law, her words were either intentional or willful ignorance. The Supreme court has no power to make law. Roe v. Wade was an opinion only, nothing more. Learn the damned Constitution!               

Anyway, after the brouhaha over this past election cycle, I am fully convinced WE THE PEOPLE need to wake the “F” up and fast! And trust me, I do believe if one uses an unchecked diatribe of profanity to convey their message, it displays an ignorance of self. But drastic times call for drastic measures, no? Only, isn’t that the message Harris and company tried to convey (the drastic end of democracy) if Trump was elected, spending one billion dollars to do so, yet failed. Imagine nine zeros’ folks. That’s one thousand millionaires. And of those who worked on her campaign, I wonder how many walked away millionaires, while how many millions of regular individuals, in part, funded that billion? A mind-boggling thought process if one can take off their party blinders. And while this morning I’ve digressed to where I didn’t want to go, I implore America: Read the Federalist Papers; Share Ricology!