Recently, a leader of a major tea party organization received the following email from a well meaning liberal. The point of his message was that in his opinion, our Constitution was a great work at the time it was written, but that it was outdated and irrelevant today. Below is the text of his email:
I have a question regarding the Tea Party’s emphasis on protecting the Constitution. The Constitution was a revolutionary work with novel new ideas that our founders invented. Most of the ideas were largely unseen in the world up until that time. Since then many countries have formed similar constitutions drawing from many of the democratic principles found in ours. But our Constitution is over two hundred years old. Society has changed incredibly since it was written. Our forefathers were smart, but even they couldn’t have seen this far into the future. Nor do I think they would have wanted the Constitution to remain forever in its original form, despite drastic changes in the world at large. Our forefathers supported changing the status quo. They would not have wanted to make themselves into superhumans, their word dictating our country indefinitely into the future. Don’t you think we ought to consider what is best for out society before considering what is most Constitutional?
Fortunately, there are still Patriots who know that our Constitution is brilliant and timeless and that it’s not a living document that should change with the current mood. The following counterpoint to the above email was penned by Orlando conservative activist, talk radio host and and tea party American, Jason W. Hoyt:
Admitting that our founder’s work was “revolutionary” with “novel new ideas” was an important admission on your part. You also reference, however, the fact that “society has changed” and that the document was written 200+ years ago. I get it, “society has changed”, we’ve progressed and there’s no way our founder’s could have foreseen such advances in technology and our constitution must change with the times, right?
Tell me what, exactly, needs to change:
- Should we still have freedom of speech, or should the government tell us what can be said and by whom?
- Should we still have freedom to worship as we see fit or should the government tell us when and where and if we may worship?
- Should we have the right to defend ourselves and especially protect ourselves against a tyrannical government or not?
- Should we still have the right to a trial or should we just let a few people in government determine our fate when accused of a crime?
- Should we still spread power amongst several branches of government with different responsibilities and have each branch check and balance the others or should we just have a simple centrally planned government where only a few determine what’s best for the many?
It’s very important that you answer each of those questions. Do you believe we are free or do you believe the government should take a larger role in our lives?
Plainly spoken: There is nothing outdated in the US Constitution. Yes, if the 2nd Amendment that guarantees us the right to bear arms began to list the type of weaponry we’re allowed to use and if it said muskets and 2-wheeled cannons pulled by horses, then yes, I’d admit the Constitution is outdated. If the Constitution told Congress they shall make no law limiting our right to free speech on parchment paper and only when standing on a stump in town square, then yes, I’d suggest we update the document.
The founders, in fact, were brilliant because they purposefully knew society would change. Free speech is free speech no matter where and in what form. Defending ourselves against tyranny is our right no matter the weaponry of the time.
The US Constitutions is timeless, my friend.
Moreover, the US Constitution is the document that protects these rights and many more. The Constitution is a document that tells the government what it can and can’t do. It’s not a document that lists our rights because our rights come from God, they are Naturally ours. No document should list our rights.
And THAT is the reason I would suggest that the US Constitution is THE most Progressive and advanced governing document ever written. In the history of the world, what is revolutionary about the US Constitution and our form of government is that we recognized for the first time that our rights come from God, they are naturally ours, and that We The People wish to rule ourselves in a representative constitutional Republic. We recognized in the Declaration of Independence that the proper role of government is “to secure these rights governments are instituted among men”. That’s it. We’re FREE. We have Liberty, and we formed a government that’s sole purpose is merely to secure our rights, not dictate to us what those rights are. Moreover, the Constitution was written to limit how the government can interact with the people while securing our rights. Do you understand how significant that is??
And lastly, I would suggest that any form of government or government program suggested by Progressives today or for the last 150+ years is not progressive at all. Progressives are in fact regressive as they wish to take a giant leap back in time and rule over people. They wish to go back to a medieval way of thinking with central planners that tell the people what they can and can’t do. They wish to plan our lives, tell us where to live, what to eat and they will steal and redistribute wealth to achieve their goals because the end justifies the means. They wish to set up rules and mandates and to guarantee equal outcomes for all the commoners. Our founders studied history, they’d seen all that before and they founded a country that was different, that was advanced and respected the individual like no other country had nor has since.
Amen! Here’s the link to Jason Hoyt’s Facebook page: www.Facebook.com/JasonWHoyt.