This made me sick. Way to start the morning.
The country that our Founding Fathers knew has already been completely destroyed, but some folks seem intent on destroying every last trace of what we were. I'd call it treason if treason was still a crime.
I don't think it's socialist to acknowledge that the Constitution and other historical documents were written in a specific time period. I mean, many historical documents included language referencing slavery which isn't something we find acceptable today. The Constitution isn't the Gospel. It's far more important (to me at least) that we follow that.
ReplyDeleteWell, the problem isn't that the Constitution and Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence are historical documents. The problem is with the idea that they are merely products of their time and currently either irrelevant or outdated. It's essentially disguised postmodern deconstructionism which would allow for socialist interpretations (which is what would happen, of course).
ReplyDeleteAlso, what are you implying about "referencing slavery?" Of course the Bill of Rights references slavery. It outlaws it in the 13th amendment. Perhaps you meant references in the Constitution? But I can't find any.
And of course the Constitution isn't the Gospel. The point is that the Constitution is foundational legal document of our country. If you ignore that, you destroy the legal legitimacy of our current government (which is probably already destroyed, but that's another topic for another time).
Clearly, God's law trumps positive law, but that doesn't mean that the Constitution and Bill of Rights don't reinforce natural law or at least don't violate it. Or do you mean to say that the Constitution violates Scriptural principles of state authority?
Anyway, I hope this reply doesn't come off as being too strong. I just think you're beating up a straw man. No sense in wasting energy, eh?
Cheers,
In fact, Amber, after reading your comment again, I'm not really sure I know what your point is. Perhaps I've misunderstood you.
ReplyDeleteD.E. I understand your dismay that a publisher would put a warning label on the constitution and other founding documents. I do think that your assessment is correct that our country has strayed from its democratic republic and instead has embraced a socialist ideals. I think that is the reason that the author put the warning label on "the highest law of the land". I think the ideas that our country were founded on offend the more socialist ideas of the publisher.
ReplyDeleteI think that Amber is not as committed to the ideals that our country was founded on as you are. And, because of this she does not understand your distress. To her it isn't that important. She seems to see the founding documents as products of their time period and not really relevant to her life. She sees the Gospel as a document to be followed. Amber, I agree with you. The Gospel is the most important law that we have. We should love it, obey it, study it and treasure it and share it. But I have one question: if the highest law of our land that was founded on Biblical principles is changed to be more "relevant" what will happen if that law thinks that the Gospel is dangerous and should be outlawed? The highest law of our land is of tremendous importance. It will determine the freedom in which we can or cannot live.