Dorothy Anne Seese
America is a nation founded upon the "rule of law"
Sun Sep 22 03:48:52 2002
208.152.73.168

America, Stand Up and Identify!
July 12, 2000



By Dorothy Anne Seese
http://www.politicalusa.com/dorothy4.htm 

There is no doubt as to the intention of the Pilgrims and the Puritans
when they came to America to establish colonies for religious
freedom. They set forth their beliefs in the Mayflower Compact and
that document is preserved to this date as part of our nation's
heritage. It is dated in the year 1620.

One hundred and fifty-six years later, in 1776, the colonies rebelled
against the Crown and set forth their Declaration of Independence,
stating among other things, that man is "endowed by his Creator with
certain inalienable rights" and that among these are "life, liberty and
the pursuit of happiness." (Actually, the theological foundation of that
is subject to debate as to accuracy, but this is not the proper forum.)
The next document, on which we rely today as the cornerstone of
American freedom, is the United States Constitution and its Bill of
Rights, along with subsequent amendments. Notice, at this point,
that the Constitution may be amended.

While there is abundant historical evidence as to the original colonists
and settlers in America being largely of European descent, over the
past 224 years the Euro-American percentage numbers have
dwindled. There is abundant evidence that America was at one time
considered a "Christian" nation because it was founded largely upon
the Judeo-Christian ethic, and by Christian people seeking religious
freedom from state or other control. There was no such movement
as the "Christian Right" because Americans were largely considered
to be Christians, whether they actively believed and practiced the faith
or not.

Catholics, protestants and unbelievers came to the shores of this
nation seeking opportunity and freedom from oppression. They came
because America is a nation founded upon the "rule of law" rather than
the whims of rulers.

During the past half-century the ethnic mix of America has changed.
The religious beliefs have changed for many, although not all. The
patriotism of the homogeneous Euro-Americans carried through
World War II and perhaps the Korean conflict, but hardly into the Viet
Nam era. Once again, America rebelled, and America is still in
rebellion. The rebellion is ethnic, political, moral, religious and to an
extent, economic. Now we have some serious questions to ask and
some serious thinking to do about our answers.

1. Does the "rule of law" mandate majority rule with respect for
minority rights? I believe emphatically "yes." Being a Christian (and
presumably people label me as "Christian Right Wing") do I deplore
the moral decline of America? Most surely I do. Do I want to see
Christian values devalued by a new majority in America? No. But I
have to recognize what the rule of law implies. If the so-called "moral
majority" in America is no longer a majority, then all that for which we
stand may well be changed, but it must be changed at the ballot box
and by congressional action, not by Supreme Court decisions. If we
as Christians are no longer the majority, then we must be a vocal and
undeterred minority voice upholding the standards of morality for
which this nation once stood as a unified whole. If we are still the
majority, then we must assert the right of majority rule and demand
appropriate action from our lawmakers and not bow to a ruling junta
called the Supreme Court.

2. Can America change directions? Yes, it most certainly can. In
fact, it has already done so, to the embarrassment of many and the
delight of some special interest groups. In the wake of correcting the
social inequities of racism we have had all manner of special interest
groups demanding "minority rights" under laws never designed to
include them. However, America has and can continue to change
directions, and will doubtless do so. We need to find out just WHO
the majority in America really is, and enforce the rule of law rather than
allowing others to tell us what we must or should think.

3. Just what constitutes Freedom? This nation's original idea of
freedom was to be free people within the framework of a fair and
equitable legal system. It was not flawless, but it was the most noble
venture yet planned by man, for man. We were to be free to practice
the religion of our choice, including none. We were to have the right to
free speech and free assembly. We were to have the right to keep
and bear arms provided the use of such arms was done in a lawful
manner. And perhaps most importantly, those matters not specifically
delegated to the federal government were to be retained by the
individual states. Now this definition begs the question: are we still a
free people?

4. Where do we go from here? First let's examine where we have
gone over the past half-century. Briefly, we have gone from a nation
with a few social programs to a big-brother nation of overwhelming
government intervention in the affairs of its citizenry, including the
rights of states to enact and enforce the laws voted by a majority of
the people. The real question is, how does the voting public regain
control of its majority rule in the face of a froward Supreme Court? I
can merely suggest that Mohandas Ghandi overthrew the British in
India by refusing to do anything the British ordered done. Can thirty or
more states become "Wacos" all at once? Perhaps that is worth
thinking about to some extent.

This article in no way implies that the writer advocates the use of force
by any group to take control of the nation. To do so would deny that
there is a rule of law or a meaningful ballot box still available in this
nation. What is being asked is, who is the American majority? What
is their will? Why are majority votes being struck down by narrow
margins in the highest court of the land? What will the electorate do
about it?

It would be my hope and my prayer that this nation would be able to
see an about-face, a change of direction to more conservative values,
more honor for the family and the home, more civil respect. It would
also be this writer's hope that the nation will reverse its moral decline
and realize that the saying "garbage in garbage out" applies far beyond
the computer world in which it originated. We as Christians would like
to see the former standards of morality restored to the public
conscience. However, if the public conscience refuses them, and
such is the will of the majority, then we must still do the work of
maintaining an outcry against immorality and debauchery.

Over the past eight years we have heard just about everything
associated with the term "redefined." There is no need to redefine the
rule of law. It stands without need of redefinition. What is needed is a
redefinition of who we are as a people and what we really stand for. I
may not like what I see, and I will write and speak out against those
things that go against my ethics, but within the framework of the law.

Further, I have every intention of stating that the highest form of
double-speak we have in this nation is the swearing in of its highest
officials on a Bible that the Supreme Court says can't be in public
buildings because it is a violation of the separation of church and state
clause. (Perhaps the Chaplain of the United States Senate could
comment on this seeming paradox? Or is being the Chaplain of the
Senate too much of a paradox to get involved in another?)

You see how we are? It's time we stopped hiding and openly declare
who we are so we will know ourselves! Perhaps if we take one
honest step, others will follow.

© Dorothy Anne Seese
===================================================
The Communist UN's Agenda 21
The U.N. Plan for Your Community
http://www.apfn.net/Doc-008_Agenda21.htm

"The American Dream" Fire 'em all!