VARIANT INTERPRETIVE(S)

9 07 2011

Authored by William Robert Barber

There are a voluminous number of theological writings. Words written ostensibly by the indirect guidance of the divine, prompts from the spirit of the Lord, or as some believe by the very hand of God. Within these writings in original form, the faithful has found enough space for a differing of interpretive. This differing of meaningfulness has been the casus belli in many languages and geography. Throughout the world, these variants of interpretation have in practice acted as if to nullify one’s deductive process. The intrinsic blessing of sapient sense for cognitive logic is ignored. The sweetness of charity and the very empathy that is inherent within humanness is discarded for the sake of the irrational. The justification for fits of behavioral madness is often described as action prompted by unrequited faithfulness — “God wills it.” A faith founded on a derivative of the original such as Protestantism is to Catholicism, or a devotional loyalty premised to secure the prerogative of enforcing the original. To this very day thousands are blooded solely because of the differing of interpretation.

Now let’s take this very inclination of variant interpretive and apply it to the US Constitution: Since the ratification of the US Constitution this founding document has been besieged by the differing of interpretative(s). There are those operating within powerful governing positions (from yesteryear to today) that believe the constitution to be a living document, concluding that change as well as deviation from original intent is an inherent dynamic of the constitution. As a consequence, for example the commerce clause applies to much more than the trafficking of goods and services between states. In practice these persons, who believe that the constitution is a living document, surmise that the commerce clause means anything the government says it means.

The original longitude and latitude of this nation’s founding document purposefully stymied the power of the central government. The document imposed a federalist system with its emphasis on enumerated powers found in Article 1, section 8 of the constitution which set forth the authoritative capacity of the US Congress. Inclusive, the 10th Amendment states that all prerogatives not vested otherwise are explicitly limited to the States. Nonetheless the federal government’s coercive inclinations have made a sham of the principles, spirit, and meaningfulness of the original federalist intention. Today the States are mere vassals of their overlord the central government; each State lobbying and aggressively competing for federal cash.

The ratified thesis of the United States of America in 1789 was materially altered in 1913 with the passing of Article XVI. Wherein the congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. The power of the federal government to tax its citizens are draconian enough but the seriously corruptive factor; the one concern that no one in 1913 gave contemplation was the power to distribute what is collected. Distribution of taxes collected is the methodology for the blatant purchasing of political and financial influence. It is this particular that could justify the most recent federal mandate of forcing each citizen to purchase ObamaCare.

Similar to the differing of theological interpretation the constitution of 1789 has, over time experienced it’s differing of meaningfulness. Nevertheless, by means I find extraordinarily bizarre, considering the guiding principles of 1789 wherein the enunciation of individual rights was sublime, free enterprise meant a limitation of government incursion, and the idea that limited government was the raison d’être; a cherished founding premise. We are today with quite the contrary. Our bloated federal bureaucracy, the ever mounting debt and cost of governing, politicians that spend more time raising money and pursuing elections then they do legislating. And most egregious of all the omnipresent scope of central government power that effectually abates States sovereignty and functions to the detriment of individual liberty.

Well let’s see what perversion they come up with extending the debt ceiling. At least the concept of “Stop Spending” has taken root. Of course that concept has been pulled and discarded before. Do I sound pessimistic?

Advertisements

Actions

Information

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: