Can Kamala Harris Be Trusted to Protect the Rights of Americans?

Vice President Kamala Harris is famous for her flip-flopping to win votes. She is currently courting the votes of gun owners by claiming that she owns a gun and any intruder in her home would be shot. According to Amy Swearer at The Daily Signal, this is what Harris was saying while district attorney of San Francisco in 2007: 

We’re going to require responsible behaviors among everybody in the community, and just because you legally possess a gun in the sanctity of your locked home doesn’t mean that we’re not going to walk into that home and check to see if you’re being responsible and safe in the way you conduct your affairs.

Even though Harris voiced support for Columbia v. Heller defending a ban on handgun possession in Washington D.C., Swearer found it “shocking” that Harris “so brazenly and vindictively threatened to violate gun owners’ other constitutional rights.” Since Harris is not an “amateur on criminal law who can claim ignorance,” she should know that “the Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures.” Swearer continued, “As a general rule, the government can’t search a person (or his or her property) without a warrant or absent probable cause that a crime has been committed.”

According to Swearer, Harris should also know that “there’s no ‘Second Amendment loophole’ to the Fourth Amendment. There’s no asterisk with fine print excluding gun owners from the rest of the Bill of Rights.” Swearer explained, “The government can’t force us to pick and choose between our rights, nor can it condition the exercise of one right on the waiver of another.”

Americans have the right to keep and bear arms, and we have the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. We also have the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures while keeping and bearing arms.

Harris’ comments should rightly terrify Americans. You don’t have to be a gun owner or even like guns to see how dangerous this theory of governance is to a free society, and how dramatically it undermines constitutional norms.

If Harris is willing to unilaterally waive gun owners’ Fourth Amendment rights, it’s not unreasonable to ask what other rights she’d be willing to unilaterally waive, and for whom.

Can the government require all who peaceably assemble to forfeit any right against excessive bail?

Can it quarter soldiers in the homes of people who petition for redress of their grievances?

May it prohibit the free exercise of religion, but just for those who insist on their right to trial by an impartial jury?

Any American who has studied the Bill Rights knows that the correct answer is NO. Our Constitution does not work that way for anyone.

This is why Harris should never come close to becoming President of the United States. VOTE TRUMP!

Separation of Church and State

            The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday concerns that sometimes overrated idea of Separation of Church and State that is not even in the United States Constitution. Atheists and other non-Christians have been fighting Christian symbols and beliefs for many years. The first one to fall was prayer in school. The Supreme Court issued its decision on prayer in school in Engel v. Vitale on June 25, 1962. Prayer was taken out of school, and the crusade against Christianity has continued ever since.

            The latest religion-based ruling came recently about a cross that was erected in Bladensburg, Maryland, nearly 90 years ago to honor approximately 50 men from the community who died during World War I. Many of the men were buried in France, and their loved ones desired a place where they could go in their grief to remember and to mourn the loss of their loved ones. There were multiple fund-raising events before a 40-foot “Peace Cross” was finally erected in the community. “At its base sits plaque inscribed with the names of each of the men who did not make it home. The seal of the American Legion is also found on the cross along with four words: ‘Valor,’ ‘Endurance,’ ‘Courage,’ and ‘Devotion.’” (All details and quotes are from this same source.)

            The cross stood for 90 years without anyone objecting to it. In fact, it was often the staging ground for other events, such as Veterans Day and Memorial Day celebrations. Then the American Humanist Association decided in 2014 that “the cross violated the Establishment Clause due to its location on public property and the expenditure of city funds for its upkeep.”

            It did not seem to matter to the opponents of the cross that it was erected on private land, land that was taken by Maryland by eminent domain. The State wanted the land to expand a nearby highway, and the land grab included the parcel where the cross is located. Even though Maryland owned the land, there were no objections against the cross for another 50 years.

            The case finally reach the Supreme Court, and it issued a recent 7-2 decision that the 40-foot-tall cross in Bladensburg, Maryland, could stay. The decision on this case is sure to impact decisions about other religiously-based monuments in America.

            The fact that the Court ruled 7-2 should make a big statement. Only Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented on the case. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion for the majority of the court.

For nearly a century, the Bladensburg Cross has expressed the community’s grief at the loss of the young men who perished, its thanks for their sacrifice, and its dedication to the ideals for which they fought.

It has become a prominent community landmark, and its removal or radical alteration at this date would be seen by many not as a neutral act but as the manifestation of “a hostility toward religion that has no place in our Establishment Clause traditions.”

            There is no doubt that the cross originated as a Christian symbol and keeps that meaning. However, it has added secular meaning in World War I memorials. It also has historical importance because it is a reminder of loved ones and their sacrifices in a long-ago war. It has become a part of the community and represents veterans from all the foreign wars following World War I.

            The U.S. Constitution, and the Religion Clauses of the Bill of Rights in particular, was written to bring people of all beliefs or no beliefs together, and the Cross in Bladensburg has fulfilled that purpose for many years. It is only in recent years that the small minority of people who take offense with the cross and other memorials have had power to do anything about their offense. I agree with the opinion written by Justice Neil Gorsuch who discussed how tired he is of hearing the “I-take-offense” reason for suing.

In a large and diverse country, offense can be easily found. Really, most every governmental action probably offends somebody. No doubt, too, that offense can

be sincere, sometimes well taken, even wise. But recourse for disagreement and offense does not lie in federal litigation. Instead, in a society that holds among its most cherished ambitions mutual respect, tolerance, self-rule, and democratic responsibility, an “offended viewer” may “avert his eyes” … or pursue a political solution.

            Justice Gorsuch suggests that offended people take their gripe to Congress instead of filing a legal case with the courts. Justice Brett Kavanaugh seems to believe in the same course of action because he added in his opinion, “This court is not the only guardian of individual rights in America.”

            Even though millions of Americans call the court decision a win, there are some people who say that the Supreme Court did not go far enough. Emilie Kao at The Heritage Foundation gave credit to the Court for its decision but added some criticism.

While the court decided this case correctly, it did not clarify its own confusing and contradictory standards for deciding other Establishment Clause cases. Even though four justices criticized the long-discredited 1971 decision in Lemon v. Kurtzman and its “shortcomings,” they did not vote to overturn this distortion of the Constitution.

The Constitution as written, not the personal views of judges, should guide how the American people express their religious faith in the public square.

            Most Americans agree that memorials should be protected and that our religious heritage, history, and symbols are an integral part of the founding of our nation. However, other faith-based monuments are in danger until the Supreme Court scraps the “Lemon test.” Justice Clarence Thomas writes the following about Lemon.

Nearly half a century after Lemon, and, the truth is, no one has any idea about the answers to these questions. As the plurality documents, our “doctrine [is] in such chaos” that lower courts have been “free to reach almost any result in almost any case.” Scores of judges have pleaded with us to retire Lemon, scholars of all stripes have criticized the doctrine, and a majority of this Court has long done the same. Today, not a single Member of the Court even tries to defend Lemon against these criticisms – and they don’t because they can’t… It is our job to say what the law is, and because the Lemon test is not good law, we ought to say so.

            While Christians and millions of other Americans are rejoicing at the decision for this case, we should not – and cannot – rest on our laurels. The American Humanist Association declared after the decision that “Our legislative efforts will be redoubled.” Conservatives and all people who are willing to fight to protect and preserve our Constitution need to stay awake and alert. The Constitution has served our nation well for more than 235 years and will continue to do so if we will but protect and preserve it.

Unalienable Rights of Jews

            The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday goes back to the beginning days of the United States of America. The Declaration of Independence outlined clearly what the American colonists wanted in their new country: “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.”

            After fighting for independence for eight years, wise men raised up by God created the new government with the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights. The First Amendment in the Bill of Rights states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; …”

            Embedded within these two founding documents are two principles that are being overlooked today. The first is that all human beings are created equal and given rights that cannot be taken away, including life, liberty, and the right to own property. The second principle is that the government will not respect an establishment of religion or prohibit anyone from exercising their religious freedom.

            Yet, there are members of Congress who seek to take these rights away from certain groups of people while allowing other groups to do and say whatever they choose. I am writing specifically about the hateful anti-Semitism of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and the support she receives from the Democrat Party, particularly the progressives and the Black Caucus.

            Omar, 37, was born in Mogadishu and lived her first years in Somalia. Her mother died when she was two years old, and she was reared by her father and grandfather. She fled with her family when civil war in Somali broke out in 1991, and they lived in a refugee camp in Kenya for four years. Her family was resettled in the United States in 1995, first in Virginia and then in Minnesota. She attended school in Minnesota and graduated from North Dakota State University with a bachelor’s degree in political science and international studies in 2011. She is a naturalized citizen. She was elected in 2016 to serve in the Minnesota House of Representatives. In November 2018 she was elected as the first Somali American to the U.S. Congress. She was sworn into office on a copy of the Quran and is the first woman to wear a hijab on the House floor. She identifies as a Democratic Socialist, is the Congressional Progressive Caucus whip, and serves on the Committee on the Budget, the Committee on Education and Labor, and on the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

            Omar is also guilty of anti-Semitism and is decidedly against support for Israel. She supports the boycott Israel movement. She made some anti-Semitic comments about a month ago, gave a weak apology, and then doubled down on them. Apparently unable to help herself, she made more anti-Semitic comments, which were threatened with a House rebuke. The Democrat Party leaders backed down on the rebuke.

            It seems that the Jews, the chosen people of God, are coming under greater threat these days. Having an anti-Jew Muslim on the powerful Committee on Foreign Affairs does not bode well for the Jews who are threatened by both the far-Left and the far-Right elements.

            Omar in particular and the Democrat Party in general do not appear to like Jews in spite of the fact that Jews overwhelmingly support the Democrat Party. The Jews are somewhat like Blacks in that they continue to support a party that cares nothing about them. Maybe the latest action will convince them that Democrats do not support Jews or Israel. Maybe there will be an exit of Jews from the Democrat Party just as there is an exit of Blacks.

Patriotic Family Reunion

            Families, communities, and nations are strengthened when family members reunite to strengthen bonds and to enjoy each other’s company. It is time once again for the reunion for my parents’ posterity. Since the theme of the reunion is patriotic, some members of the family decided that I should make a presentation as part of a larger program. To fulfill this responsibility, I put together the following presentation.

            I introduce my presentation by explaining why I began studying about government and the Constitution in the first place. After the 2008 presidential election, I began to feel concerns for the future of our nation. As a result of these concerns I embarked on a study of the U.S. Constitution, government, etc. From what I was seeing and hearing in current events as well as what I was studying about how the government should work, I feared a possible question from my grandchildren and great-grandchildren. The question that so frightened me was: “What were you doing while the U.S. Constitution was being destroyed?”

            I felt a great need to share my new knowledge and understanding with my family, but I did not know how to do it. In May 2009 I began to feel promptings to write a blog in order to share this information. Since I knew nothing about how to set up a blog and had little writing experience, I procrastinated for several months. By September 2009 the promptings were so strong that I knew that I could no longer ignore them. So I set up a blog and started posting.

            This September will begin my ninth year of writing a blog, and I continue my blog for the same reason that I started it. I do not worry about who may read my blog or how many followers I have. I assume that what I write is being found by those people who need the information.

            During the past eight years I have read many books and articles in an effort to gain needed knowledge and then attempted to share that information with other people. I have probably forgotten most of what I learned, but I have retained basic understanding in some areas. I believe that following three topics are important information for all Americans.

I. There is a relationship or connection between the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.

            According to Rob Natelson at IndependenceInstitute.Org, the “Declaration is a statement based on natural law” – law that “consists of fundamental principles of justice and right.” Religious people believe natural law comes from God, and “Atheists who believe in natural law … view it as a collection of rules inherent in the way the universe works.”

            Natelson continues his explanation of natural law: “The men who approved the Declaration” believed that their natural rights came from God. They believed the following:

(1) people have equal dignity before God, (2) God grants people rights or powers, some of which are transferable (alienable) and others not transferable (inalienable or unalienable),

(3) government is erected primarily to protect people’s rights, (4) government is a fiduciary enterprise, subject to rules of public trust, and (5) the people may alter government when it does not serve their purposes.”

            According to Natelson, “The Constitution … is a statement of positive law. Positive law consists of rules enforceable by governmental authority. There are many positive laws, but the Constitution was designed to be the supreme positive law.

            “The Founders believed that in a perfect world, positive law would be the same as natural law. In an imperfect world that is impossible, but we should try to make positive law approximate natural law as closely as feasible.”

            The Preamble to the Constitution is basically a summary of what its writers wanted the document to accomplish: They wanted it to bring more unity to their new nation; they wanted it to provide justice for every person; they wanted it to bring peace to the people; they wanted it to bring the ability to fund a military to defend the nation, and they wanted it to bring prosperity to all citizens. In short, they wanted it to bring the blessings of freedom for themselves as well as all following generations.

II. God was behind the writing of the Constitution.

            In many places in the Book of Mormon, the writers state that God preserved and protected the American continents as a land “choice above all the lands of the earth” (Ether 13:42). The writers also tell us that the safety and prosperity of Americans lies in righteousness. The Book of Mormon tells us that Nephi saw a vision of the coming of Columbus, Pilgrims, and others to America, the Revolutionary War, and the success of the Americans in gaining independence from Great Britain. Of course, Nephi did not name the people or events as I have done, but any serious student can understand what Nephi saw.

            We read in the Doctrine and Covenants that God established “the laws and constitution of the people” and commanded that the Constitution be “maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles.” We also read that God “established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom [He] raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood” (D&C 101:77, 80). 

Even though the Constitution was inspired of God, not every word is divine in nature.

            The writers of the Constitution were wise men, but they were not prophets. The Constitution was inspired, but it is not scripture even though some of it sounds scriptural. The Constitution came about after much debate and compromise between learned and wise men.

            The February 1992 Ensign has an article by Elder Dallin H. Oaks titled “The Divinely Inspired Constitution.” and gave a list of five fundamental principles that were inspired.

1. Separation of powers. The inspiration for separation of powers came long before the writing of the Constitution. The idea of separation of powers had been around for at least 100 years and was well established in the American colonies. The various colonies adopted constitutions during the Revolution that “distinguished between the executive, legislative, and judicial functions.”

“The inspiration in the convention was in its original and remarkably successful adaptation” of this “idea of separation of powers to the practical needs of a national government. The delegates found just the right combination to assure the integrity of each branch, appropriately checked and balanced with the others.”

2. A written bill of rights. Again, the idea of a Bill of Rights was not new. Nearly 600 years before the Constitution, the Magna Charta “contained a written guarantee of some rights for certain” subjects.” Elder Oaks says that the “inspiration was in the brilliant, practical implementation of preexisting principles.”

“I have always felt that the United States Constitution’s closest approach to scriptural stature is in the phrasing of our Bill of Rights. Without the free exercise of religion, America could not have served as the host nation for the restoration of the gospel, which began just three decades after the Bill of Rights, was ratified. I also see scriptural stature in the concept and wording of the freedoms of speech and press, the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, the requirement that there must be probable cause for an arrest and that accused persons must have a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, and the guarantee that a person will not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”

            Before I leave Elder Oaks’ words on the topic of the Bill of Rights and move on to his next principle, I want to clarify that the Bill of Rights was written because the people were afraid that their new government would become a tyrant, such as the king from which they had just won independence. It is important for all to understand that we have the Bill of Rights to protect us from our own government!

            The Second Amendment, the right to own and use guns, is apparently the most dominant one because it is the power that protects the other rights. Once a government takes away the freedom to use guns for self-protection, the government can do whatever it pleases. This is the main reason for the assault on the Second Amendment.

            If you do not believe that there is an assault on the Second Amendment, Oregon’s House and Senate just passed a bill that allows the “confiscation of an individual’s firearms. [The law] creates an Extreme Risk Protection Order, which forces the subject of the order to hand over all firearms, as well as his concealed carry permit if he possesses one.” The Oregon bill is based on a California law and allows a judge to decide “whether guns should be taken from [the individual] without due process of the law.”

3. Division of powers. “Another inspired fundamental of the U.S. Constitution is its federal system, which divides government powers between the nation and the various states. Unlike the inspired adaptations mentioned earlier, this division of sovereignty was unprecedented in theory or practice. In a day when it is fashionable to assume that the government has the power and means to right every wrong, we should remember that the U.S. Constitution limits the national government to the exercise of powers expressly granted to it [by the Tenth Amendment]. This principle of limited national powers, with all residuary powers reserved to the people or to the state and local governments, which are most responsive to the people, is one of the great fundamentals of the U.S. Constitution.

“The particular powers that are reserved to the states are part of the inspiration. For example, the power to make laws on personal relationships is reserved to the states. Thus, laws of marriage and family rights and duties are state laws.”

4. Popular sovereignty. “Perhaps the most important of the great fundamentals of the inspired Constitution is the principle of popular sovereignty: The people are the source of government power. Along with many religious people, Latter-day Saints affirm that God gave the power to the people, and the people consented to a constitution that delegated certain powers to the government…. The sovereign power is in the people. I believe this is one of the great meanings in the revelation which tells us that God established the Constitution of the United States, `That every man may act … according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment. Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another. And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land.’ (D&C 101:78-80.)

"In other words, the most desirable condition for the effective exercise of God-given moral agency is a condition of maximum freedom and responsibility. In this condition men are accountable for their own sins and cannot blame their political conditions on their bondage to a king or a tyrant. This condition is achieved when the people are sovereign, as they are under the Constitution God established in the United States. From this it follows that the most important words in the United States Constitution are the words in the preamble: `We the people of the United States … do ordain and establish this Constitution.’ …

"Popular sovereignty necessarily implies popular responsibility…”

5. The rule of law and not of men. “Further, there is divine inspiration in the fundamental underlying premise of this whole constitutional order. All the blessings enjoyed under the United States Constitution are dependent upon the rule of law. … The rule of law is the basis of liberty.”

            The U.S. Constitution was the first written constitution in the world, and it is the pattern for the constitutions in many other nations. It was written 230 years ago, and it is still relevant. It is the Supreme Law of our land and should be followed. It includes instructions on how to amend it if necessary. In more than 200 years, it has been amended only 27 times. I encourage all of my readers to embark on a study of the U.S. Constitution and join the effort to protect and preserve it for many generations to come.

On Guard

                The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday is the simple fact that we must be ever watchful and keep our guard up, or we will lose rights, freedoms, and liberty. The judicial system from the lower courts to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) seem ever willing to bestow rights not outlined in the Constitution and to weaken or destroy rights actually listed in the Bill of Rights.

                In recent years we have watched helplessly as the highest court in the land has legalized murder of infants (abortion) and sodomy (same sex marriage). At the same time, we have seen judges do their best time after time to deny Americans the rights to defend ourselves. Self-defense is an unalienable right given to us by God and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. Yet, judges continue to water down the Right to Bear Arms enshrined in the Second Amendment.

                Daniel Horowitz discusses this irony in his article “An Inconvenient Right: Ninth Circuit Fails to Protect 2nd Amendment.” He writes, “Let’s be clear here:  There is only one enumerated right in the Bill of Rights for which the unequivocal language of `shall not be infringed’ is used. That language is not used for abortion or forced recognition of alternative lifestyles as marriage against the will of the states. (In fact, it doesn’t talk about those things at all in the Constitution. Yet, the courts are saying states can’t even implement common sense health regulations on abortion clinics.) The one right that is mentioned explicitly in unmistakable language, on the other hand, seems to be open to all sorts of political arguments by the courts.”

                Horowitz reminds his readers that criminals do not bother to have background checks and then writes, “Placing a 10-day waiting period is a substantial burden, especially for first-time purchasers who often make the decision out of an imminent sense of fear or need for self-defense.

                “Such a restriction is manifestly unconstitutional for those who are approved quickly by the federal background check system….

                “The same courts that nullify every legitimate state power – from marriage and abortion regulation to election maps and even adhering to natural law – are suddenly deferential to state laws that are incontrovertibly against the plain language of the Constitution.”       

        

                The article by Horowitz is very interest and lists two additional observations:  (1) “The lower courts are killing the Second Amendment. SCOTUS remains silent”and (2) “The courts are a one-way dead-end for conservatives.”

                The Bill of Rights has been part of the Supreme Law of the United States for more than 225 years. The guardian of freedom has done its job well. Now we must preserve and protect that law in order for it to continue to preserve our rights, freedoms, and liberty itself.

Do Not Repeal the Bill of Rights

                The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday concerns the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

There are people in our nation demanding that the Bill of Rights be repealed.  I believe the people do not understand the importance of the Bill of Rights to the freedom of all Americans.

                There has been a slow and steady erosion of the freedoms we enjoy in the United States.  Bit by bit progressives have attacked the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.  Any further erosion could take all of our liberties.  Please do not let anyone convince you that the Bill of Rights is outdated.

                This quote is attributed to Thomas Jefferson and bears some pondering:  “Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense.  Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure…. On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” 

Bill of Rights

                When we speak of the Bill of Rights we are referring to the first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States.  “During the debates on the adoption of the Constitution, its opponents repeatedly charged that the Constitution as drafted would open the way to tyranny by the central government.  Fresh in their minds was the memory of the British violation of civil rights before and during the Revolution.  They demanded a `bill of rights’ that would spell out the immunities of individual citizens.  Several state conventions in their formal ratification of the Constitution asked for such amendments; others ratified the Constitution with the understanding that the amendments would be offered.”  

                The ratification of the Constitution was threatened by fears of Anti-Federalists about giving too much power to the new federal government.  These amendments “guarantee a number of personal freedoms, limit the government’s power in judicial and other proceedings, and reserve some powers to the states and the public.  While originally the amendments applied only to the federal government, most of their provisions have since been applied to the states by way of the Fourteenth Amendment, a process known as incorporation.”

                James Madison, known as the father of the Constitution, introduced twelve amendments to Congress as “a series of legislative articles.”  The House of Representatives adopted them on August 21, 1789 and made a formal proposal by joint resolution of Congress on September 25, 1789.  Ten of the proposed amendments became Constitutional Amendments on December 15, 1791, after three-fourths of the states ratified them.  One of the two remaining amendments became the Twenty-seventh Amendment 203 years later, and the other amendment is still pending before the states.

                The Bill of Rights is important to Americans because it “enumerates freedoms not explicitly indicated in the main body of the Constitution, such as freedom of religion, freedom of speech, a free press, and free assembly; the right to keep and bear arms; freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, security in personal effects, and freedom from warrants issued without probable cause; indictment by a grand jury for any capital or `infamous crime’; guarantee of a speedy, public trial with an impartial jury; and prohibition of double jeopardy.  In addition, the Bill of Rights reserves for the people any rights not specifically mentioned in the Constitution and reserves all powers not specifically granted to the federal government to the people or the States.  The Bill was influenced by George Mason’s 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights, the English Bill of Rights 1689, and earlier English political documents such as Magna Carta (1215).

                “The Bill of Rights had little judicial impact for the first 150 years of its existence, but was the basis for many Supreme Court decisions of the 20^th and 21^st centuries.  One of the first fourteen copies of the Bill of Rights is on public display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.”  

Unalienable Rights

For this Freedom Friday, let's discuss the principle of liberty that all men "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." We know from this statement in the Declaration of Independence that the Founders understood that the basic rights of mankind come directly from God and not from any government authority. These unalienable rights are also called natural rights. No one has the authority to take these rights from us without answering to God, but we can use our agency unwisely and forfeit them. It is important that we understand that our basic rights come from God and not from the government. Rights that come from God can be taken away only by God. Rights that come from the government are often taken away by the government. If we believe our unalienable rights come from the government, then there is a good chance that government will start to take those rights away from us. The rights created by governments are called vested rights. They include such rights as the opportunity to hunt in a certain area or season and the opportunity to use a certain highway. These are the kinds of rights that the government has authority to change or take from us. The Founders did not include all of mankind's unalienable or natural rights in the Declaration of Independence. Some other natural rights are enumerated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights: the right to self-government, the right to bear arms, the right to worship as we choose, the right to a fair trial, the right of free press, the right to petition our government, the right to speak freely, and the right to assemble. There are still other natural rights such as the right to choose our own mate, profession, and to have children. The phrase "pursuit of happiness" was well understood at the time it was written, but some people in our day question what it means. John Adams clearly explained it when he stated, "All men are born free and independent, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights, among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness." (George A. Peek, Jr., ed., The Political Writings of John Adams, Liberal Arts press, New York, 1954, p 96, as quoted by W. Cleon Skousen in The 5000 Year Leap, p 96).

Thomas Jefferson

My VIP for this week is Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826). He is best remembered as the author of the Declaration of Independence and as a great President. He is also famous as a diplomat, political thinker and a founder of the Democratic Party. He did not considered himself to be a professional politician but a public-spirited citizen and practical thinker. Jefferson was born on April 13, 1743, at Shadwell, a family estate of more than 2,500 acres in Virginia. As the oldest son in a family of two boys and six girls, Jefferson inherited Shadwell at age 14 when his father died. The estate was managed by a guardian until Jefferson was 21. He was a tall, red-haired Virginian boy who developed interests in hunting, fishing, horseback riding and canoeing. He also learned to love music and to play the violin. He began his formal education with a tutor and spent two years at the College of William and Mary at Williamsburg. As a boy he learned Latin, Greek, and French. During his years at William and Mary, he formed many of his ideas about humanity and God. He began studying law in 1762 and was admitted to the bar in 1767. Jefferson was reared in the Anglican Church but learned to distrust organized religion. He wrote the following in his old age: "To love God with all thy heart and they neighbor as thyself is the sum of religion." At age 29, Jefferson married a young widow named Martha Wayles Skelton (Oct. 19, 1748-Sept. 6, 1782). According to legend, two rival suitors withdrew after watching Thomas and Martha play a duet on the harpsichord and violin. He designed and supervised the building of a new home at Shadwell and called it Monticello. The home was not yet finished when the bridal couple moved into it. They had one son and five daughters, but only two daughters lived to maturity. Martha died in 1782 after only ten years of marriage. He never remarried and reared his two daughters alone. Jefferson was a revolutionary leader but never fought in the Revolutionary Ward because he thought he could do greater good by staying in Congress. He was appointed to be on a committee with John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston to write a declaration of independence. The committee unanimously asked Jefferson to prepare the draft and approved it with few changes. Congress made some changes but adopted it on July 4, 1776. The Declaration of Independence remains Jefferson's greatest accomplishment. Congress sent Jefferson to France to work with Benjamin Franklin. He became minister when Franklin resigned and went back to America. Jefferson was in France when the Constitution of the United States was written. His friend, James Madison, sent him a draft of the Constitution, which he approved but urged that a bill of rights be included in it. Jefferson's political career included being a member of the Continental Congress, a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, governor of Virginia, Congressman (again), minister to France, secretary of state, vice president and two terms as President of the United States. While Vice President, he also served as leader of the Senate, at which time he wrote A Manual of Parliamentary Practice For the Use of the Senate of the United States, which is still is use today. Jefferson was the first United States President to be inaugurated in Washington, D.C. He was also the first President to live in the White House, which was only partly built when he moved in. While Jefferson's daughter Martha Randolph served as hostess of the White House from time to time, his most popular hostess was Dolley Madison, the wife of his secretary of state. Jefferson's grandson, James Randolph, was the first child born in the White House. Jefferson was a poor public speaker but was a great writer. He was the first President to send his annual message to Congress rather than deliver it. This practice continued until Woodrow Wilson revived the tradition of the President appearing before Congress to deliver his remarks. The area of United States doubled in size in 1803 (May 2) with the Louisiana Purchase. This purchase ranks as one of Jefferson's greatest achievements even though it was a French idea. Jefferson sent James Monroe to France to help the American minister Robert Livingston negotiate with France for New Orleans and the Floridas. Before Monroe arrived in Paris, Livingston made a modest proposal for New Orleans. Livingston was astounded when the French foreign minister asked, "What would you give for the whole of Louisiana?" Negotiations, which took place after Monroe's arrival, helped the United States to gain control over the Mississippi River and to almost double its area. Jefferson felt like he was stretching the Constitution to make this purchase, but the Senate ratified the treaty by a vote of 24 to 7. Other highlights of Jefferson's administration include: 1) War with Tripoli (1801-1805); 2) The United State Military Academy opened (July 4, 1802). 3) The Supreme Court decided the case of Marbury v. Madison (Feb. 24, 1803); 4) The Lewis and Clark Expedition set out for the Northwest (May 14, 1804); 5) Amendment 12 to the Constitution was adopted (Sept. 25, 1804); 6) The act prohibiting the importation of African slaves became law (Jan. 1, 1808). Even though many people urged Jefferson to run for a third term, he chose to follow the example of George Washington. He retired from the presidency at age 65 after serving two terms. He retired from politics but was consulted on public affairs. James Madison and James Monroe, his successors in the White House, freq1uently sought his advice. Jefferson had little money left. He sold his library of more than 6,400 volumes to Congress to replace the books destroyed by the British when they burned the Capitol during the War of 1812 (1812-1815). He was aided by public contributions in his later years. After his death, Monticello passed out of his family. Jefferson died on July 4, 1826, the same day that John Adams died. It was exactly fifty years after the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. He was buried beside Martha at Monticello. He wrote the following inscription for his tomb stone: "Here was buried Thomas Jefferson, Author of the Declaration of American Independence, of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom, & Father of the University of Virginia." He ranked these accomplishments higher than being President of the United States. Jefferson left many good and famous quotes. I like the following ten statements, which he wrote in a letter to his namesake, Thomas Jefferson Smith, dated February 21, 1825: "1. Never put off till to-morrow what you can do today. 2. Never trouble another for what you can do yourself. 3. Never spend your money before you have it. 4. Never buy what you do not want, because it is cheap; it will be dear to you. 5. Pride costs us more than hunger, thirst, and cold. 6. We never repent of having eaten too little. 7. Nothing is troublesome that we do willingly. 8. How much pain have cost the evils which have never happened. 9. Take things always by their smooth handle. 10. When angry, count ten, before you speak; if very angry, an hundred." Facts for this blog are from an article by Noble E. Cunningham, Jr. in World Book Encyclopedia, Vol. 11, pp 76-87.