Sunday, June 8, 2008

Interesting Things From California's Constitution

Interesting Things from California's Constitution

From the Preamble to California's constitution:

“We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this Constitution.”

The mention of God in political life is not the establishment of religion. It is the free exercise thereof. The lawyers and the courts know this, but they are deliberately ignoring our constitutional rights.

From the California Constitution, Article 2, Section 1.

“All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require.”

The authors of this constitution were serious about this article. This is not just the political double-talk to which we in the twenty-first century have grown far too accustomed. While the process by way of which the legislature may amend the constitution is every bit as complex as that of the United States Constitution, the ability of the people to amend the constitution is quite simple. A referendum with a reasonable, yet serious number of signatures is presented to the secretary of state, and a simple majority decided the issue. No matter who we elect to write laws for our nation, corruption abounds, and, rather than serving as the referees, Jefferson envisioned, the courts have behaved so abominably that we need to enact an instant replay, via a California style referendum procedure to protect ourselves from judges who are betting on the games.

Of course there is a down side to this. The majorities in a great number of these United States would have, historically, had the potential to write some horrid amendments into their constitution. However, in retrospect one can only wonder whether or not the open debate leading up to some of those amendments might have gone farther to heal the wounds of racism in America than the courts intjecting themselves into the situation ever did. When the founding fathers authored the constitution, democracy was new and terrifying. The wealthy were terrified that the poor would take their properties by way of the vote. It is sad how very correct they have often proven to be.

Nonetheless, the notion of setting the legislature and courts as the arbiter’s of mob rage has not worked well in the last fifty years. If the abuse of states rights led to the Civil War and the increase of nationalism, it is appropriate that the courts' abuse of their authority should result in a return of authority to the people of these United States. While an amendment to the constitution defining marriage (again), or one declaring the right to bear arms (again), or another declaring plainly that majorities in every community have the right to proudly exercise their religion while they meet in free and lawful assemblies: graduation, school athletic events, and town counsel meetings might all be hard to gather a two thirds majority for; on the other hand, it might be difficult to persuade the people of the United States that we ought not to amend the constitution of the United States to include an initiative, referendum and recall procedure like California’s. How do the pandering politicians try to explain that we are to incapable of judgment to be trusted with this right?

Then at least we can recall judges that overstep their bounds and pass amendments to clarify their wicked imposition on American society.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Hello there everybody, I just registered on this excellent community forum and wished to say gday! Have a terrific day!