Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘thomas jefferson’

This Physical Education Textbook Chapter on ‘Riflery’ will Blow a Liberal’s Mind


waving flagBy Gary DeMar July 19, 2016

What’s happened in America with guns? Why is it that tens of thousands of high school students took riflery classes for decades and there was very little gun violence in the United States?

I came across a Physical Education textbook that included chapters on riflery and archery – implements that shoot pointy projectiles.

PE_Rifle_CoverThe book Physical Education for High School Students was originally published in 1955 with a revised edition in 1960 and a second edition published in 1970.

Here’s the opening paragraph from the chapter on “Riflery”:

The United States of America was built, it is said, with three implements: the axe, the plow, and the rifle. The axe, in the hands of the stalwart pioneer, felled trees to clear the way for fields of grain. It also provided timber to build the houses, barns, and fences of our farms. The plow cut into the virgin soil of our foothills, plains, and prairies to grow the food for a young and hungry country. The rifle brought down the deer, bear, and other game to give the hardy frontiersman and his family food and clothing. It also stood as the only means of defense against his enemies, both savage and civilized.”

Throughout the chapter on Riflery there are very good instructions on how to use a rifle properly and safely. There’s even a picture of an “assault weapon.”

PE_Rifle_03

The chapter ends by declaring “Shooting is probably the safest of all sports. . . . By practicing a few simple rules every shooter can become a safe shooter.” This next sentence will make a liberal’s head explode: “One of the greatest sources of pride for the National Rifle Association is the splendid record in the safe handling of firearms set by their junior members.” The NRA is praised by a public school textbook!

The issue is not only the safe handling of firearms but the character of the person handling a firearm. Moral relativism cropped-george-washington-regarding-2nd-amandment.jpgis the operational worldview of the day. Everything is up for grabs. It’s OK to kill unborn babies, redefine marriage, and even change your sex. In fact, you don’t even have to change your sex; you can just declare yourself to be whatever sex you want. It’s topsy-turvy morality, and if you say so, then you’re a racist and a homophobe who does not have the right to express your opinion.

Bill Nye “The Science Guy” and resident Village Atheist recently said that death is the end of everything. This means there is no Ultimate Judge of our deeds in this life. So what is the moral objection to killing someone? Who says anything is ultimately morally wrong? No atheist can account for objective morality. 

There was a time when people believed that one day they would be judged for the deeds done in this life. God was considered to be the Supreme Judge of the world.” Thomas Jefferson wrote the following in a letter to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse Monticello in 1822:

“The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.

1. That there is one only God, and he all perfect.

2. That there is a future state of rewards and punishments.

3. That to love God with all thy heart and thy neighbor as thyself, is the sum of religion.

Not anymore. Even the views of Thomas “Separation of Church and State” Jefferson would not be welcome in our nation’s government schools. Evolutionary atheism is the operating religion of our nation’s elites and the institutions they control. This new religion promotes “survival of the fittest,” “nature, red in tooth and claw,” with the benefits of rape thrown in for good progressive measure.

Evolutionary atheism is the operating religion of our nation’s elites and the institutions they control. This new religion promotes “survival of the fittest,” “nature, red in tooth and claw,” with the benefits of rape thrown in for good progressive measure.Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Barbara Reynolds, former columnist for USA Today, writes about the effect of evolutionary dogmatism in our nation’s schools:

“Prohibiting the teaching of creationism in favor of evolution creates an atheistic, belligerent tone that might explain why our kids sometimes perform like Godzilla instead of children made in the image of God.

“While evolution teaches that we are accidents or freaks of nature, creationism shows humankind as the offspring of a divine Creator. There are rules to follow which govern not only our time on Earth, but also our afterlife.

* * * * *

“If evolution is forced on our kids, we shouldn’t be perplexed when they beat on their chests or, worse yet, beat on each other and their teachers.”1

Reynolds’s comments are reminiscent of what C.S. Lewis wrote: “We make men without chests and we expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and we are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”2 We strip men and women of the certainty that they are created in the image of God, and we are surprised when they act like the beasts of the field.


  1. Barbara Reynolds, “If your kids go ape in school, you’ll know why,” USA Today (August 27, 1993), 11A. 
  2. C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (New York: Macmillan, [1947] 1972), 35. 

fight Picture1 true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Commentary: America is Spiritually, Morally, and Financially Bankrupt


waving flagCommentary By Pamela Adams April 2, 2016

Benjamin Franklin once said, “I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it.” 

The Democratic Party has two candidates who are falling all over themselves trying to outdo the other in making people “easy” or comfortable in their poverty.  Candidates Sen. Bernard Sanders and Hillary Clinton both want to prove that they are the one willing to give away more free stuff:

  • free college,
  • free rent,
  • free phones,
  • free abortions,
  • free birth control,
  • free healthcare,
  • free food.

You don’t need to work or even try to become successful.  The government will take care of you.  The only thing that neither wants free is the American people or their speech.

That being said, the GOP race evidences another aspect of Franklin’s quote.  Americans are not just comfortable in their monetary poverty, they are also equally comfortable in their spiritual poverty.  On Good Friday, the National Enquire ran a story ‘claiming’ candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (TX) – R allegedly had affairs with five women.  Anyone bothering to read the article realized it was written as a defense lawyer’s dream.  It was filled with “allegedly”, “claimed”, “supposedly” and other such words that mean, “You can’t sue us because we didn’t actually accuse anybody of anything.”  It is essentially a page out of CBS News’ National Guard story against George W. Bush that was completely based on fake documents, but that didn’t matter.  The story itself was too important.

However, it’s not the fact that a hit piece was used. Such things are expected in elections. What’s troubling is the public’s reaction to it. The best example is Michelle Collins of “The View,” who giddily admitted she hoped this scandal was true, because Cruz lives by a “crazy moral code.”  She wants to see a man like that fall.

Another co-host, Candace Cameron Bure, a devout, unapologetic Christian, called Collins out on her statement, rightfully pointing out that Ted Cruz (TX) – R’s so-called “crazy moral code” is actually a biblical lifestyle.  Though Collins relented to that fact, she continued to ramble on about wanting to see him fail because “he’s not a good guy.”

Why does she think he’s not a good guy?  Because he believes life begins at conception and that he doesn’t think taxpayer money should fund the abortion clinics known as Planned Parenthood?  Or is it because he believes in traditional marriage and Christian business owners shouldn’t be forced to participate in a same-sex wedding?  Maybe it’s just because he believes in the Constitution and that States have more rights than the federal government.  Trump has said many times he would stop such attacks on Christians.  If that is the case, this attack on Christian values should offend his supporters even if they dislike Cruz. In a similar fashion, the Black Lives Matters protesters at Trump rallies who intentionally attempt to paint him and his supporters in a bad light should equally offend non-Trump supporters.

We have gone from a people who rightly looked up to George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Benjamin Franklin, not because they were perfect men, but because they tried to be honorable, virtuous men. They sacrificed everything for liberty and freedom for all posterity.  But America is now so incredibly comfortable in our spiritual poverty that people are actually delighting in the fact that Cruz could be destroyed by what appears to be a completely false story because it damages a faithful Christian.  Are we so morally void of any decency that, as many have said, they actually don’t care whether it’s true as long as it destroys Cruz while completely dismissing what it does to Heidi Cruz, her girls, the five suspected women and their families?AMEN

Since the time of Woodrow Wilson and the progressive war on America started discrediting Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Franklin, we have crushed our moral compass and discarded our national role models.  Resulting is our comfort in our ethical poverty including coveting, greed, pre-marital sex, abortion, divorce, open affairs, lying, cheating, stealing, murdering, gossiping, and bearing false witness. In our enlightened world, we can openly violate the Ten Commandments as long as it gets us ahead.  We have become so comfortable and lazy in our spiritual poverty we jump on Twitter to call people “bitch”, “whore”, “slut”, “stupid”, threaten and delight in the thought of a gang rape.  We are becoming morally bankrupt towards others simply because they hold a difference of opinion or support another candidate.Different Free Speech Ideologies

2016 Americans name-calling and election-time mudslinging is nothing new in American politics.  John Adams and Thomas Jefferson had just as nasty of a campaign as we are seeing today.  But there was one big difference.  The insults of the 1800 election were hurled through articles written by Adams and Jefferson themselves with a few willing newspaper participants.  Today we are barraged with a 24-7 news cycle, talk radio, “The View,” podcasts and Twitter.  Rather than watching the back and forth of two candidates trying to out maneuver the other, we as a population are throwing verbal assaults at each other and refusing to find common ground.

For a population that has felt crushed under the foot of Obama and political correctness, Trump has given people the feeling of freedom to say whatever they want.  At the same time, the anonymity of the Internet has given us the protection to attack anyone with a differing opinion.  It is liberating.  But in a civil society we need to function under our own personal moral compass or we fall under the weight of our own depravity.  As it says in 1 Corinthians 10:23: “Everything is permissible,” but not everything is beneficial.  “Everything is permissible,” but not everything is edifying.

Adams supporters and Jefferson supporters were able to come together after the election because the insults lobbed were between the two candidates, not the common man.  How are we as a people going to unite after a year of personal insults, personal attacks, and personal threats against each other? Some hurling those insults openly profess they don’t want to unite, often saying, “We don’t need you anyway,” and “Get out of the way or get run over.”  America, we are in real trouble and unless we enrich ourselves spiritually, or at least morally, it doesn’t matter who becomes president, Clinton, Cruz, Sanders or Trump, we are done as a free republic. We will require a dictator because we will become so uncivilized that society will demand someone come in and put a boot on the neck of those who can’t control themselves.

As Franklin warned, “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” 

Is it possible for Trump and Cruz supporters to be civil with each other when we both claim we want to disrupt the establishment, stop ISIS, end illegal immigration, stop refugees, strengthen the economy, and limit the reach of the government?  We share common wants and beliefs.  Why can’t we share common civility?  If we can’t, we will share a common poverty, both in spirit and in the wallet, under Commandant Clinton or Bernard Sanders. 

But that’s just my 2 cents.
Die true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

What Would the Founders Think of the 2016 Election? Not so Much Different from 1800.


waving flagBy Pamela Adams March 28, 2016

Accusations of sexual misconduct.  Choruses of liar, dirty tricks, coward and dictator. Warnings of war.  Allegations of ineligibility. Using sympathetic media to not only cushion a candidacy but to spread propaganda about opponents.

What would our Founding Fathers think of this behavior?  Well, since this is describing the 1800 campaign between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, they must have considered it business as usual.  

Election-of-1800

During this highly political and dirty campaign, many citizens thought their very young country would not survive such a vicious display between presidential candidates.  Two men that just 24 years earlier stood together against England and composed the Declaration of Independence, were now at war with each other.  The past four years they were the two highest elected officials in this new country; President Adams, a big government Federalist, and Vice-President Jefferson, a small government Democratic-Republican.  Now, they were the worst of enemies.

Adams supporters suggested, “we would see our wives and daughters the victims of legal prostitution,” and “murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest will openly be taught and practiced,” if Jefferson were elected.
Jefferson people responded in kind, calling Adams a liar, a “repulsive pedant”, and a “gross hypocrite”.  Going even further, Adams was described as behaving “neither like a man nor like a woman but instead possessed a hideous hermaphroditical character.”  That’s being born with both male and female sex organs, folks.
1804 Election poster.
1804 Election poster.
After the election was held and Jefferson was victorious, another problematic issue arose.  Both Jefferson and his running mate, Aaron Burr had received 73 electoral votes each.  At the time, there was not a distinction between votes for President and for Vice-President.  It was strictly majority wins.  While the issue was rectified with the 12th Amendment in 1804, this election went to the House of Representatives, which at the time was still full of lame-duck Federalists to break the tie.

Alexander Hamilton, who vehemently despised Burr, led the charge to convince House members Jefferson would be the lesser of two evils.  Burr lost favor with Jefferson as well as he started actively trying to steal the Presidency after running as Jefferson’s VP.  Jefferson eventually won the House election and Burr received the Vice-Presidency, largely due to Hamilton’s involvement.  The two continued feuding on both personal and political issues until July 11, 1804, when Burr challenged Hamilton to a dual and shot him.  Burr was never prosecuted even though Hamilton died the next day.  He apparently could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not loose support.

Things were not much better during the re-election campaign of President John Quincy Adams against Andrew Jackson.  Jackson’s wife, Rachel Donelson, had been married to Lewis Robart, an abusive and obsessively jealous man.  After finally leaving him, Rachel was told Lewis had divorced her.  In truth, he had just petitioned the State of Kentucky for a divorce on the grounds of desertion.  Rachel and Jackson then married only to discover Lewis never followed through with the divorce.  Once Lewis discovered she remarried, he did obtain an official divorce and Jackson and Rachel quietly remarried.

Though the mixup was understood by friends and family, political opponents used it as a way to paint Jackson as an adulterer and Rachel as a bigamist.  Imagine what they would have done with a candidate who openly bragged about his affairs with married women.  A strong, Christian woman, Rachel was completely dismayed by the slander.  The trumped up scandal took it’s toll on Rachel and shortly after Jackson was elected, she suffered a severe heart attack.  She died before he was inaugurated.

The only thing more disgusting than the ugliness of politics is the disingenuous behavior of the media.  They pit the candidates against each other, asking questions designed specifically to cause attacks against each other, and then act appalled when the mud starts flying.  “Tell us how disgusting your opponent is,” followed by “I can’t believe what you just said about your opponent.”  Ted Cruz exposed this in the first debate by calling the moderators out, repeating one-by-one their agenda driving questions.  He ended by reminding them, “This is not a cage match.”

It’s no wonder the Main Steam Media has lost its relevance in the world and more and more people are turning to sites like this one for their news.  They are drug dealers who give free drugs to get people hooked, and then criticize and demean the addict for wanting and needing a fix.

The Democratic-Republican Party eventually split in the late 1820’s.  One group followed Andrew Jackson and formed the Democratic Party.  The other group followed John Quincy Adams and formed the National Republican Party, which soon evolved into the Whig Party. Around the same time, the Federalist Party completely dissolved as well with its members also integrating into the two newly formed parties. 

John Adams and Thomas Jefferson eventually mended their broken relationship and spent years engaging in a friendly correspondence until their deaths.  The two men both died on July 4, 1826, the 50th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, each feeling outwitted by the other for being outlived, as neither knew of the other’s death.

As a good majority of us cringe with every ugly assault lobbed this primary season, even our Founding Fathers stumbled into the same pit of degradation we are today. 

Even so, I’d rather be there than in a dictatorial, authoritarian or fascist system where we don’t have the freedom to voice our objections.  How we emerge at the end of this cycle, I don’t know, but in 1800 the two political parties died within 30 years.  I would say most American’s, both Republicans and Democrats, would be pretty ok with that today.  Maybe we’re just ripping off the bandaid, enduring short-term pain by exposing the wound, so we can begin healing once the sting is gone.  At least, that’s what I’m praying for.

But that’s just my 2 cents.

Pamela AdamsPamela Adams

Pamela J. Adams maintains TheFactsPaper.com which includes her blog Liberty Letters. She is a stay-at-home mom who began researching history, science, religion, and current events to prepare for home schooling. She started Liberty Letters as short lessons for her daughter and publishes them for everyone’s benefit. Pamela has a Degree in Mathematics and was in the workforce for 20 years as a teacher, Marketing Director, Manager and Administrative Assistant. You can contact her through her website or follow her Liberty Letters accounts at Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr.

Die true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

OUCH: Does THIS Thomas Jefferson Quote Apply To Cruz AND Trump?


waving flagPublished on March 26, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/03/ouch-does-this-thomas-jefferson-quote-apply-to-cruz-and-trump

qmeme_1459005921471_560

Thomas Jefferson knew exactly what would happen to anyone wanting to hold public office. Do you think this applies to all men or just Trump or Cruz?

Die true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

 

OPINION COMMENTARY: 20 REASONS Why Thomas Jefferson Would Think BHO Is A Total P*ssy


waving flagWritten by Doug Giles on January 7, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://news.clashdaily.com/2016/01/20-reasons-why-thomas-jefferson-wouldve-thought-bho-was-a-total-pssy

Screen Shot 2016-01-07 at 10.36.49 AM

If TJ is in heaven right now, and he’s able to peer through some celestial portal and behold the BS Barack has saddled this nation with — a country, by the way, that Jefferson labored to make independent from tyrants — then I would bet that Thomas is more ticked than a boar that just had its balls clipped.

How do I know Jefferson would loathe Obama and seek to jettison our Jester-In-Chief?  Well, it’s principally via Thomas’ musings — musings that, for the time being, we’re still afforded the wherewithal to access; principles that also happen to have made our nation great and that used to be taught in our school system.

Plow through the following from one of our nation’s illustrious framers’ quills and try to tell me with a straight face that Jefferson wouldn’t have sought to derail BHO via tooth, fang and claw. Oh, BTW… I also believe he would’ve loathed Hillary as well. Check it out.

  1. The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere.
  2. It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself. Subject opinion to coercion: whom will you make your inquisitors?
  3. A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.
  4. If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.
  5. The multiplication of public offices, increase of expense beyond income, growth and entailment of a public debt, are indications soliciting the employment of the pruning knife.
  6. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever. 

  7. No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms [within his own lands or tenements].
  8. The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.
  9. Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. 

  10. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.
  11. I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, & as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.
  12. It is of great importance to set a resolution, not to be shaken, never to tell an untruth. There is no vice so mean, so pitiful, so contemptible; and he who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good disposition. 

  13. I am not among those who fear the people. They, and not the rich, are our dependence for continued freedom. And to preserve their independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. 

  14. The disease of liberty is catching; those armies will take it in the south, carry it thence to their own country, spread there the infection of revolution and representative government, and raise its people from the prone condition of brutes to the erect altitude of man. 
  15. Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories.

  16. Still one thing more, fellow-citizens — a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities. 

  17. A private central bank issuing the public currency is a greater menace to the liberties of the people than a standing army. We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.

  18. Born in other countries, yet believing you could be happy in this, our laws acknowledge, as they should do, your right to join us in society, conforming, as I doubt not you will do, to our established rules. That these rules shall be as equal as prudential considerations will admit, will certainly be the aim of our legislatures, general and particular.

  19. I have been happy … in believing that … whatever follies we may be led into as to foreign nations, we shall never give up our Union, the last anchor of our hope, and that alone which is to prevent this heavenly country from becoming an arena of gladiators.
  20. I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.

Tree of Liberty 03 2 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

33% of Americans Believe It’s Time for States to Openly Defy the Feds – And that Number is Growing!


waving flagPosted by

URL of the original posting site:  http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/10/33-of-americans-believe-its-time-for-states-to-openly-defy-the-feds-and-that-number-is-growing/#ecLkFE5EXopqZ3rh.99

SCOTUS GIANT

A recent Rasmussen poll, which was conducted in July of 2015 discovered that 33% of Americans support the States openly defying the federal judiciary because of bad behavior, ie. Acting lawlessly. The poll was taken following the Supreme Court’s illegal and unconstitutional ruling on redefining marriage to include those who practice sodomy and their previous ruling regarding the unconstitutional healthcare mandate nicknamed Obamacare.

Thirty-three percent of likely voters believe the States should exercise their Tenth Amendment rights and ignore the federal rulings because they are in violation of the enumerated powers granted to the judiciary under the Constitution. According to Rasmussen, these numbers are now up nine points since February, at which time just 24% supported such a measure. Those who disagree fell from 58% in February to 52%. Apparently, a whopping 15% aren’t intelligent enough to know the difference to make a decision.

“Perhaps even more disturbing is that the voters who feel strongest about overriding the federal courts – Republicans and conservatives – are those who traditionally have been the most supportive of the Constitution and separation of powers,” reports Rasmussen. “During the Obama years, however, these voters have become increasingly suspicious and even hostile toward the federal government.”

The polling firm also pointed out that when it comes to those in political parties, fifty percent of Republicans side with the states, while just twenty-two percent of Democrats and thirty percent of independents also side with State’s rights on the issue.

The survey consisted of 1,000 likely voters and was conducted between June 30 and July 1, 2015.

Pastor Matthew Trewhella, author of The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrates: A Proper Resistance to Tyranny and a Repudiation of Unlimited Obedience to Civil Government, commented on the judiciary and Supremacy Clause:

The federal judiciary has long built this fiction that they are the sole and final arbiter of what is constitutional or unconstitutional. They base this upon the Supremacy Clause which is Article 6, paragraph 2 of the U. S. Constitution. They claim that Article 6, paragraph 2 grants the Supreme Court supremacy to determine whether laws are constitutional or unconstitutional.

Funny thing is – when one actually takes time to read Article 6, paragraph 2, they realize that the Supreme Court isn’t even mentioned. In fact, federal courts aren’t even mentioned. What is mentioned – and is declared to have supremacy – is the U. S. Constitution itself and all laws made in accordance therewith.

In other words, America’s founders did not establish judicial supremacy as the Supreme Court is wont to assert (and thereby usurp all other branches of government) – rather they established constitutional supremacy.

All magistrates in America – whether federal, state, county, or local – did not take an oath of subservience to the federal government nor the federal judiciary. Rather, they took an oath to uphold the U. S. Constitution.

True federalism understands that all magistrates – whatever their level or sphere of jurisdiction – possess lawful authority. And that whenever one branch of government begins to play the tyrant – all other branches (whether federal, state, county, or local) have the duty then more than ever to uphold the Constitution and oppose that branch acting tyrannically – even if that branch is the Supreme Court.

Trewhella also pointed out that founding father Thomas Jefferson tried to warn the people about the friction of the Supreme Court being understood as authoritative in all matters.

In writing to William Jarvis, Jefferson said,

“You seem . . . to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”

Jefferson had previously warned Charles Hammond in 1821, “The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal Judiciary; an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped.”

Just two years later, he would write to A. Coray,

“At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance.”

If you are one that believes the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of what is lawful and constitutional, then you have believed a lie and a myth that Jefferson warned about. The States still retain their rights to this day to defy the federal judiciary, which has become an oligarchy. We just need strong statesmen as governors and legislatures to make that stand! The people will get behind those that will take the stand, but we must first seek out those willing to put all they are on the line for the sake of freedom, not necessarily a political future.

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

OUR FOUNDERS ON ISLAM: They Slammed Obama’s ‘Beautiful Religion’


waving flagURL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2015/10/our-founders-on-islam-they-slammed-obamas-beautiful-religion

Screen Shot 2015-10-22 at 1.05.46 PM

Contrary to what Obama would like for you to believe, the founding fathers were not very fond of Islam. Check it out from Keith Farrell via The Federalist Papers….

After winning its independence from England, American vessels no longer enjoyed British protection. France, dismayed that the US would not aid it in its war against England, also ceased protection of American ships. The result led to American vessels being raided and plundered by Muslim pirates from the Barbary Coast.

After agreeing to pay 10% of the new nations dismal GDP in exchange for passage, attacks continued. Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin were sent as representatives to mediate the problem. It was there that they discovered that the Islamic law the pirates followed made it their duty to attack non-Muslims.

“The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise,” Jefferson wrote to Secretary of State John Jay, explaining peace was not possible. (The Federalist Papers)

Screen Shot 2015-10-22 at 1.06.26 PM

Ben Franklin wrote of his experience: “Nor can the Plundering of Infidels be in that sacred Book (the Qur’an) forbidden, since it is well known from it, that God has given the World, and all that it contains, to his faithful Mussulmen, who are to enjoy it of Right as fast as they conquer it.” (TFP)

Screen Shot 2015-10-22 at 1.07.07 PM

John Adams, in his report to Jay, wrote of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, and called him a “military fanatic” who “denies that laws were made for him; he arrogates everything to himself by force of arms.” (TFP)

Read more: The Federalist Papers

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: