An unfortunately true statement

[lundbaek]

I have recently been asked to serve as a merit badge counselor for boy scouts working on merit badges for Citizenship in the Community, Citizenship in the Nation, and Citizenship in the World. On page 19 of the pamphlet Citizenship in the Nation, under "Changing the Constitution, I note the following statement:

"In the informal amendment process, changes in the Constitution take place over time without altering or adding to the written words. These informal amendments develop as a result of congressional legislation, presidential actions, Supreme Court decisions, activities of political parties, and custom."

This is, unfortunately, a true statement. The so-called informal amendment process has given powers to the executive branch of the FedGov it was never intended to have by those who established the US Constitution. Such unconstitutional changes have empowered the federal government to increasingly exercise supervisory control over the state governments, to assume the role of a guardian empowered to take care of the needs of the people, including the right to control the lives and property of the people, to corrupt our monetary system, and to enter into preemptive wars, among other egregious changes to our FedGov.

As a merit badge counselor for Citizenship in the Nation I intend to, at every opportunity, state my conviction that unconstitutional changes to the operation of our FedGov should be vigorously opposed.

Before I upset a few people in our ward and stake with the above statement, I would appreciate your feedback Re. a possible better (kinder and gentler) way to deal with this matter. In other words, how would you deal with this ? Do you think this is something that would be best ignored, discussed with scout leaders only, discussed with scout's parents, and/or discussed with the boys ?

[Jarbar]

I say do what you want to do. If the parents don't like it, they can take their kids out of Scouts.

[sevenator]

Prepare to back your comments with scripture and go for it.

[InfoWarrior82]

When the Judicial branch has been compromised, the Legislative branch can run wild.

[log]

It is interesting that we can observe, and admit, that process with respect to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Can anyone imagine that there might be other documents of importance, perhaps having eternal significance, which have likewise been altered (or, if you prefer, "transfigured") by an informal process, without actually touching the text thereof?

[freedomforall]

Take them through a Constitution course so they know what it's about. Also discuss the Declaration of Independence and ask them why the people in this country ignore it. Ask them what they think ought to be done, at least they'll be aware as they mature ,and not ignorant so as to think devilish changes are okay.

[GeeR]

Hey saving the Constitution is our theology--it's doctrine! To mention that these changes are the reason the Lord has laid upon each priesthood holder and on all American citizens the charge to save the Constitution is just the context for the doctrine to save the Constitution.

Hey Lundbaek since I've got your ear, where is the quote by David O McKay where he says "we should despise" those who have disdain for the Constitution, or words to that affect? Thanks.

[lundbaek]

"I think we owe at least the consideration to be loyal to this country and to spurn with all the soul that is within us the scheming disloyal citizens who would undermine our Constitution, or who would deprive the individual of his liberty vouchsafed by that great document, and some of our men who have come up through the public schools are doing just that. Let every loyal member of the Church look down with scorn upon any man or woman who would undermine that Constitution." (address delivered on May 24, 1954, published May 29, 1954, Church News, 3) (See also "A Glorious Standard For All Mankind" by Christopher S. Bentley, Page 83)

[GeeR]

Yes, that's it, I knew you would have it, I thank you again.

[lundbaek]

Yet so many American members of the LDS Church have supported and cheered for candidates for legislative and executive office who have spoken in favour of abortion ("a woman's right to choose"), who have initiated and/or supported "legal plunder" in the forms of individual welfare, corporate welfare, and government mandated and run healthcare, who have condoned undeclared wars, and who have supported various other violations of our God-given and inalienable rights.

Most Latter-day Saints have largely forsaken in totality our responsibility to defend freedom. This does not bode well for our future.

[freedomforall]

Our Divine Constitution - Ezra Taft Benson - October 1987 General Conference

[lundbaek]

"...we must learn the principles of the Constitution in the tradition of the Founding Fathers." {President Ezra Taft Benson, October 1987 General Conference} To me at this particular time, this is the most meaningful statement in that October 1987 talk by President Benson. In addition to the formal Constitution amendment process spelled out in Article V, an informal amendment process has allowed changes in the Constitution to take place without altering or adding to the written words, changes that have empowered our federal government to increasingly exercise increasing control over the state governments, to assume the role of a guardian empowered to take care of the needs of the people, including the right to control the lives and property of the people, to corrupt our monetary system, and to enter into preemptive wars, among other egregious changes to our federal government. I find too many people who consider "informal amendments" to be constitutional and legitimate.

[GeeR]

I was working in the Wilkinson Center on the B.Y.U. campus if my memory serves me well when the J. Reuben Clark Law School was dedicated. If I remember right Justice Burger of the Supreme Court spoke and I think he gave endorsing statements to the U.S. Constitution. Then I remember Marion G. Romney spoke and conveyed his expectations that those attending the school would be defenders of liberty by being conversant in Constitutional Law.

Not too many years ago there was a graduate on the forum that attended the Clark Law School and I’m pretty sure he said he received no instruction in Constitutional Law because they didn’t offer Constitutional classes. My brother mentioned in a brief comment to me said: “Is all the J. Reuben Clark Law School produces is a bunch of ambulance chasers. One call, that’s all.”

My question then, is there anyone out there that can verify whether or not the Clark Law School does or doesn’t teach Constitutional Law? If not, it seems to me that this would be huge weapon for constitutionalist in the church to use against the hypocrisy of those [tares?] running the law school? We demand an explanation type of thing! Yes, no, maybe? What?

[sonofliberty]

My question then, is there anyone out there that can verify whether or not the Clark Law School does or doesn’t teach Constitutional Law? If not, it seems to me that this would be huge weapon for constitutionalist in the church to use against the hypocrisy of those [tares?] running the law school? We demand an explanation type of thing! Yes, no, maybe? What?

I am a lawyer but did not attend law school at BYU. However, I can tell you that every law student that graduates from an ABA accredited law school (BYU is an accredited law school) is required to take Constitutional Law. So, to answer your question, BYU Law School does teach Constitutional Law. With that being said though, my experience, which is typical for most law students to include friends of mine who attended BYU, is that not one time during the 2 semester course did we ever read from the text of the U.S. Constitution unless it was quoted in a U.S. Supreme Court case. The entire course is dedicated to learning what the U.S. Supreme Court interprets the Constitution to mean. In other words, lawyers, to include those at BYU, are taught the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States and not in the tradition of the Founding Fathers.

Hope that sheds some light on your question.

[log]

Yep. We are ruled by case law, not canon law. The constitution is a dead letter, and has been such since the Civil War.

[GeeR]

Well then from the last two replies it sure seems that constitutionalist in the church indeed have a very formidable argumentive weapon at their disposal and can make the case for hypocrisy! Marion G. Romney intent in his speech that day I'm pretty sure was about learning the Constitution in the tradition of the founding fathers. Also the above conference talk by then President Benson, as posted by freedomfighter, specifically mentions our obligation to defend the "Constitution in the tradition of the founding fathers." How did case law supersede cannon law at the B.Y.U. Clark Law School? "An enemy hath done this?"

[freedomforall]

My question then, is there anyone out there that can verify whether or not the Clark Law School does or doesn’t teach Constitutional Law? If not, it seems to me that this would be huge weapon for constitutionalist in the church to use against the hypocrisy of those [tares?] running the law school? We demand an explanation type of thing! Yes, no, maybe? What?

I am a lawyer but did not attend law school at BYU. However, I can tell you that every law student that graduates from an ABA accredited law school (BYU is an accredited law school) is required to take Constitutional Law. So, to answer your question, BYU Law School does teach Constitutional Law. With that being said though, my experience, which is typical for most law students to include friends of mine who attended BYU, is that not one time during the 2 semester course did we ever read from the text of the U.S. Constitution unless it was quoted in a U.S. Supreme Court case. The entire course is dedicated to learning what the U.S. Supreme Court interprets the Constitution to mean. In other words, lawyers, to include those at BYU, are taught the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States and not in the tradition of the Founding Fathers.

Hope that sheds some light on your question.

This explains that which you are saying. I've read the whole thing.
The United States Has Two Constitutions By Jerome Horowitz Attorney at Law

[LittleLion]

Hello lundbaek, it has been a while since I posted, or, for that matter, read anything on this forum, I hope you and yours have been well.

It is a hard subject, because as you well know most people go along to get along and refuse to see anything past their own sphere. If we all lived the way Christ wanted us to this government would not be in its present form and you would not be asking for advice

4 And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.
5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.
8 I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free.
9 Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.

(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 98:4 - 9)

I am sure you have read these words many times before. These are Christs words, not the words of a lawyer, a supreme court justice or of any person on this earth. Christ has also told us many many times what to do when confronted with evil. It is time we all start living his words as the time of our probation is far spent. If I were you I would have the Scouts read Christs words and let the spirit guide you in your pronouncements to them.

[freedomforall]

Hello lundbaek, it has been a while since I posted, or, for that matter, read anything on this forum, I hope you and yours have been well.

It is a hard subject, because as you well know most people go along to get along and refuse to see anything past their own sphere. If we all lived the way Christ wanted us to this government would not be in its present form and you would not be asking for advice

4 And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.
5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.
8 I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free.
9 Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.

(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 98:4 - 9)

I am sure you have read these words many times before. These are Christs words, not the words of a lawyer, a supreme court justice or of any person on this earth. Christ has also told us many many times what to do when confronted with evil. It is time we all start living his words as the time of our probation is far spent. If I were you I would have the Scouts read Christs words and let the spirit guide you in your pronouncements to them.

What you say is true. However, how will children learn to befriend something they know little about. The Lord also said to befriend the law of the land. The Supreme law of the land is the Constitution. All of the principles therein might be found throughout scripture, but why not use the short version that God says to befriend. This is my point. Here's why:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

SEE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[LittleLion]

This is my point. Here's why:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."
SEE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My point to lundbaek was that the only laws that are constitutional are the ones that maintain our rights and privileges and support our freedom as Christ said. The supremacy clause has been used for good and evil in this respect. You ask many a lawyer or judge and they will tell you the US code is the supreme law of the land which is nonsense. The constitution does not exist in the corporate courtroom in fact many constitutional arguments are thrown out. Exceedingly heinous evil men rule now, many people mourn and are murdered, the children should know this. Yes, everyone should read the constitution and take a constitutional class that describes the anti-federalist's concerns over federalists demands. But most Scouts do not have the time or the inkling for this type of class. Letting the scouts read Christs words then letting the spirit work in them and in lundbaeks answers to their questions is a good tack to take imo.

[GeeR]

Thank you freedomfighter, I'll read it.

[GeeR]

Hi Littlelion I wish you would post more because I really value your opinion. Thanks

[lundbaek]

Clearly, the original intent of the US Constitution was to maintain our rights and privileges and support our freedom, or in other words protect life, liberty and control of private property. Many LDS people believe that whatever the Supreme Court declares is constitutional is constitutional, and many of them also approve of many of those informal amendments.

[freedomforall]

Thank you freedomfighter, I'll read it.

You're welcome. It is a real eye opener. And for those that don't know...this is how Obamacare got passed. And it isn't about healthcare. It is about stripping away what is left of our Constitution. Taking away property, enslaving the middle-class, raising premiums beyond the ability to pay, thus, making more businesses fail or be under government rule. Seniors will not get good healthcare because they won't be able to afford it...then the fines imposed will take them under. If Americans keep waiting around we'll all be under socialism...owned by tyrants who will do with us as they will.

[lundbaek]

I particularly like the way Dr. W. Cleon Skousen put it in his book The Naked Capitalist:
"Actually, what we are witnessing is a very carefully and methodically executed program designed to destroy constitutional government as we have known it and make a shambles of the society which has wanted to keep the Constitution alive. Only then can a highly centralized, socialist state be established. To achieve this, the middle class in America must be ruthlessly squeezed out of existence."