The "Civil" Rights Act


The 41st Amendment

Section 1.

As our rights are already protected in word by the “Bill of Rights” and are by necessity an inalienable gift from God which CANNOT be granted by men with any Act or statute, The “Civil Rights Act of 1964” is Hereby repealed.

Section 2.

Congress shall make no law in regard to this Article.

Views: 1078

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

38k,

You never saw his video when you say that. So I'll assume you have a lack of understanding, as I don't believe your a troll. He spoke about slavery and the point of it: is their slavery in the past any worse than everyone's slavery today? To me, I would look at both sides of this slavery.

But then that was truly hard to fathom as it went over many people's heads but I noticed that the people with adequate education seemed to notice his use of the English language.

You ever been a Rancher? You ever have to work on a Ranch? I would say that if you did, your boots probably didn't fit correctly.

Or you feel that free land is a welfare project when in fact many received free land but they had to live off it and this was at the least very difficult.

To support one's family from dirt; your whole statement really allows me a good laugh. I don't wish to put any pressure on your admissions but truly you don't understand that a gift of land is a hardship not a silver spoon, for it's up to one to make dirt grow food and that is one thing Bundy and his family in the past have been able to do well.

Unalienable rights come to us from God, while Civil Rights were invented by our government to control the people and to deprive them of the rights which were granted to them by their Creator. As an individual I do not have a right to tell others what to do or how to think and the government that was created by the people cannot lawfully impose its will on people. The concept of Civil Rights gives the government the power to rule the people, when it was created to be ruled by the people.

When we violate another man's rights, we have violated his human rights, regardless of his race, color or creed. All men and women were created equal in the sight of God and government should hold people accountable when they harm someone else. The government's role is not to seek to micro-manage our lives and punish people for exercising their free agency.  

One of our most fundamental rights in the right to contract, (Hale V.Hinkel, 1906). Both parties in any contract have a right to make an offer and to accept or reject offers by the other party to the contract. In other words we have a right to do business with whomever we choose.

The government does not have the authority to tell me which box of cereal I must purchase any more than it has a right to tell me that I must sell my house to someone not of my choosing. When the government  steps on the side of one of the parties to a potential contract they must first violate the rights of the other.

I don't disagree with your basic premise.  I do disagree with the insertion of the word "God".  The Declaration, and the founding fathers who wrote our founding documents, believed in "Nature's God".  They were Deists.  They didn't believe in the Christian God.  In fact, in reading the words of the writers of the enlightenment (the ones who inspired our founding fathers), nature's god is more panentheist in nature.

It seems to me that if you want to make this argument go forward, you shouldn't be insulting better than half of the population who are growing more and more afraid of a more and more militant and oppressive religion.  Just stick to the facts and you don't lose people like me who would otherwise support you.

Gail,

Thomas Jefferson mentions "nature's God" in the Declaration of Independence, but, this phrase is unclear. The religious beliefs of Jefferson were much debated in his time and still are over two centuries later. Jefferson's parents reared him in the Episcopal Church, and his beliefs are, therefore, based in Christianity. He wrote to Charles Thomson in 1816: "I, too, have made a wee-little book from the same materials, which I call the Philosophy of Jesus; it is a paradigma of his doctrines, made by cutting the texts out of the book, and arranging them on the pages of a blank book, in a certain order of time or subject. A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."  Jefferson was a Deist who respected Christ's teachings

Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants, and two were Roman Catholics. But, most certainly, none of the Founding Fathers were atheists. 

John Adams wrote the following to Thomas Jefferson; The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature.

Samual Adams wrote in "The Rights of the Colonists" (1772) "The right to freedom being the gift of the Almighty...The rights of the colonists as Christians...may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutions of The Great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament." This is not to suggest that the US is a "Christian" nation, but rather, Christian beliefs were fundamental to our development as a country.

It is said that 51 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence held a "Christian worldview." That doesn't mean the 51 were Christians, but their views were certainly in agreement with Judeo-Christian beliefs. It is highly unlikely they would draft a document contrary to their beliefs.

Here is a list of the founding fathers church affiliation, almost all Christian.  Only Thomas Paine is usually listed as a Deist.   The Christian religion is not a militant nor oppressive religion when scripturally followed (New Testament). Some Christian churches may be oppressive and militant so they are not following Christ's teachings but their own philosophy. http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html 

That list is not useful.  First of all, it's from a Christian website and second:  It doesn't list who is who.  As an expert in American  history and Constitutional history, I can say that it doesn't serve your position well.

For example, on Christian lists, George Washington is listed as a Christian.  However, when he was president, he attended church regularly until the priest mentioned to him that he left every Sunday right before communion, which was not very seemly.  Washington replied, let it not be said of me that I am a hypocrite.  He left and never went to church again.  Washington was a freemason and a deist.

Adams - President no. 2 was Christian, for sure, but he was adamantly against state infringement of religion.  The first Constitutional Convention nearly came to an end over a religious fight about who was to give an opening prayer.  No one wanted to pray a prayer said by a heathen (of another denomination) and some didn't want to say prayer at all.  A prayer was finally agreed upon before the whole meeting was deemed a waste of time.

Jefferson: President No 3:  Deist.  Loved the teachings of Jesus but had a hard-core dislike of christianity.

Madison:  President No. 4:  Deist.  Believed in "nature's god" and that religion means following one's conscience without regard to someone else's opinion.  He wrote about it in great detail.

Alexander Hamilton - atheist.  He wanted the state to be the national god.

Ben Franklin - long thought to be a Quaker, but he was a Freemason - didn't believe in the Christian God.

You can say that SOME churches are oppressive and militant, so they are not following Christ's teachings, but where churches are so SILENT as women and LGBTs are stripped of their inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then those who keep silent are as millitant and oppressive as the ones they pont to.

Christianity has become a terrifying religion for a growing number of the American population.  Perhaps that's why that of those aged 18-24, LESS THAN ONE PERCENT have a biblical worldview.  It's not much better for those who graduate from Christian schools.  Only 19% of those graduates have a biblical worldview.

I do not write this to hurt.  I write it to make the point that if you want the Constitution to be followed, then by harming those who could help you make it possible, and by confusing God's will for you and God's will for me, you chase away your own supporters, and I don't understand why you would do that. 

Is that working for you?  Aren't you afraid of blowback? The hatred that is growing is like nothing I've seen in my 60+ years when it comes to religion.

Keeping the word "God" out of the Constitution doesn't take God out.  It just takes any existing god out of the picture.  America is filled with many faiths.  You can insist that there is only one God, and the god of the Bible is it, but until you prove it, you must make way for the rest of America  --  those people you see as an enemy even though they want to help you.  Please explain

Gail,

So, please tell me how we have so many Judeo-Christian (J-C) inscriptions on our monuments and government buildings, if there is little, or no, Judeo-Christian influence in our beginnings.

I find it appalling that people object to the J-C teachings and beliefs. It's not like they inspire killing of Non-Jews, Non-Christians, gays and protitutes. Just what is the objection to promoting good clean wholesome values, regardless of where they originate or what religion(s) subscribe to that ideology?

     So Inquires,

          The BOJWON

Roger, what does your post have to do with putting the word "God" into the Constitution?

PS:  Don't you like the 1st Amendment.  I do.

Lets look at the 1st amendment  to  peoples  Bill of rights in their States.

where is it in the Constitution? Ahh could it be in the original bill of Rights?  Lets preface this with the decision of Justice John Marshal in Barron vs Baltimore in 1833 when his writ stated that the Constitution was not an enumeration of rights for the people but the power they( the people) give to the federal Government.

Now he also tore the initial bill of rights from its inclusion and put it where it belonged in the States as the States were their places of residence.  Now where is the 1st amendment? Liberals have seen fit to include it in the Constitution and the Supreme Court has seen fit to decide upon it. For a judge (liberal) said in a decision that the federal government could control religion by not including it in matters in the judicial aspect of man's law.

Now I ask you  where was the 1st amendment a Federal decision?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Ok now this must be put into proper perspective as the Constitution has been changed by later Legislators for taxes, Pensions, ETC.

Lets get real about how God, which the 10 commandments accedes to,  sits in the area of the Supreme Court where they decide upon the Constitutionality of our people and little of the very Government they were made to watch.

Gail,

I can see that you don't reply to the points I bring to the conversation, but I will give you the courtesy of answering yours.

There is only one "God." There has been no mention of multiple gods, but for those who believe there is more than the one god, they are free to worship them in any way they choose - cows, goats, cats, horned entities or trees included. The discussion was related to the Constitution mentioning the rights that God has granted "man" with no mention of any particular religion or method of worship. The Constitution does not, nor do I, suggest that one faith is dominant over another, but instead suggested that the Constitution is based on the Judeo-Christian concepts, which Diests happen to agree with –

Thou shalt not kill; Thou shalt not steal, etc. "Thou shalt not kill" is a guideline I think we can ALL agree with, regardless as to how many religions profess it and I suggest that The Founding Fathers thought those principles worthy enough to influence what they drafted. Anyone whose faith disagrees with those principals can stick their religion where the sun don't shine - IMHO.

I like the Second Amendment just fine. Where did I suggest otherwise?

My post stated that a minimum of 79.5% of the "Founding Fathers" were associated with Christian faiths, as supported by my post. You ignored that and accused me of positions I did not take, a tactic used by the Left regularly to detour dialog away from what they don't like.

Now, if you'd be kind enough to read the questions I posted earlier, AND REPLY TO THEM, I'll continue an intelligent dialog with you. If you don't, I'll consider the discussion closed.

So where are our civil rights?  Are they in the Civil Rights Act?  Are they in  the 14th amendment? But wait the 14th gives one privileges not rights.

Now let me get this straight. If The 14th gives us citizenship under the 14th with privileges what happened to the Bill of Rights which are from the very law of God agreed upon In the initial Congress and which people gave up those rights from the Bill of rights? I didn't, my father didn't, his Father didn't. Now once more from the very legislation of those legislators of old we find that we have lost that which our Founders gave to us.

The Constitution unfettered,  a government afraid of the people, and Laws common to God.as the people fear their God.  Thus is established a Union of Freedom and justice to the degree of the responsibilities of those Sovereigns to that task.

And the Ide's of March approach.

RSS

© 2019   Created by Online Professor.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service