The United States and the U.S. Constitution

| March 10, 2013 | 20 Comments

ONE-HUNDRED FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CONSTITUTION, 1941 - 1945The Constitution of the United States is much more than just a piece of paper; it is a document written by God fearing men who believed in Liberty and Justice for all who are citizens of this great nation and their Posterity. While the U.S. Constitution is a guide for ourselves and for those who represent us, the U.S. Constitution is much more; it is the “law of the land” and should be viewed as such, as well as considered whenever any of the three branches of government, i.e., Legislative, Executive, or Judicial, enact new laws or perform the duties of their respective offices. I also believe every Citizen of the United States should question themselves with regard to their actions; are we Just, are we promoting the general Welfare, are we striving to ensure Liberty, are our actions helping to form a more perfect Union? These ideals cannot simply be for one, they must be for all, as eloquently stated by our fore-fathers, “We the People of the United States.”

On the 17th day of September in 1787 the U.S. Constitution was Ordained and Established; the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788. This document gave us reasonable guidelines by which to govern ourselves in a responsible and civil manner and the delineation of the processes by which we elect government officials, the formation and function of the three separate branches of government and the duties of each within the boundaries of the Constitution of the United States. Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution also guarantees to each and every State in the Union a “Republican Form of Government,” whereby the individuals as well as the States themselves are sovereign.

Enough cannot be said about the value and intent of the words within the U.S. Constitution itself. Article II, Section 1, Clause 8 clearly states the President shall, “Preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Article VI, Clause 2 clearly states, “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, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Article VI, Clause 3 goes on to further state, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.” Undeniably, the framers of the Constitution of the United States demanded the continued preservation, protection, defense and support of the Constitution in perpetuity for the People of this great nation. There can be no doubt the Constitution of the United States is the Law of the Land. Our leaders are bound by the oaths of their offices to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

The U.S. Constitution is a means to promote not only the general Welfare, but to promote an equitable system of governance, through just laws which provide the framework to form a more perfect Union. As stated in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1, “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority.” The U.S. Constitution is the conception of an ideal by decent, free thinking men, whose sole purpose was to live a life free of tyranny from those who would oppress us, and to ensure those same ideals existed for their Posterity.

The United States of America is, in effect, not only a conglomeration of people, but of ideas as well. Through the supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. Constitution, sovereign citizens of sovereign States, within a sovereign nation act to establish a just and equitable society, where Liberty is unfettered and the government exists to serve the People.

While the art of articulation does not elude me, I find myself unable to match what I consider to be a perfect man-made statement of Truth and Wisdom: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and to our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

God Bless this Great Republic, the United States of America

Brett L. Baker

Brett Baker was born in the sovereign State of Washington and graduated from the University of Washington. http://mytreatises.blogspot.com

Article Source:
http://www.articlebiz.com/article/1051591506-1-the-united-states-and-the-us-constitution/

Filed in: Uncategorized
×

20 Comments on "The United States and the U.S. Constitution"

Trackback | Comments RSS Feed

  1. tura mardin says:

    US Secretary of State John Kerry : Thanks to the US Constitution, "you have a right to be stupid..... pancho villa's skull...is this stupid?

  2. arronwrath says:

    How should state governments treat the laws and court decisions of other states?
    A. Conflicts among the states are handled by the federal judicial system.
    B. The full faith and credit clause of the U.S. Constitution requires every state to honor the laws and court decisions of every other state.
    C. The Tenth Amendment states that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution are reserved to the states.
    D. The states have sovereign power and can ignore the decisions made by other states.

  3. Samuro says:

    You need to look at http://www.dictionary.com and see what a republican is and what a democrat is. LOOK at this.... U.S. Constitution: Article IV, Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. .......................... We need in AMerica at least two more terms of republican power befroe we vote democrat again............ SOme do not see this.. I fear for my nation because of this. I pray for there greed of power not to overtake the nation.. As you can see with the other answers ,we are in trouble. FOlks are brain washed and do not see that there lives and there childrens lives depend upon two more terms of republican power....America was founded upon Republican,Christian and masonic Ideas.

  4. borabora5524 says:

    Given the choice, if you were the president of the United States, and you faced the following dilemma:

    --You have proof that terrorists are about to attack the country's infrastructure, causing massive loss of life, and
    --You feel that the only way to stop them is to violate certain provisions in the U.S. Constitution, particularly in regard to amendments prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure, ensuring habeas corpus, and prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment,

    What would you do?
    You can call it a false choice, but I see it happening right now. The president attaches signing statements to laws he signs that effectively allow him to enforce the laws the way he wants, not as Congress has directed. That is a violation of the Constitution and of the presidential oath, but the White House justifies it in the name of national security.

    So a better way to ask the question is: Should portions of the Constitution relating to criminal rights be disregarded if it would save the nation from terrorist attack?

  5. dubmecrazy3 says:

    indeed it does

    Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution:

    "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion..."

    what excuse do the liberals have against national doctorine....and just what do illegals interpret this to mean?

  6. therundown2k3 says:

    I have looked on their websites, but, the appear only to be interested in signing up new members.
    Why do they violate the U.S. Constitution?
    The United States Constitution was created for "We The people of the United states" and no one else. So why do they defend ILLEGAL immigrants?

  7. Alun J says:

    Does our U.S. Constitution state that we must have capitalist financial system, and that we must be a specific religion?

  8. David says:

    United States Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall described the U.S. Constitution as “defective from the start.” According to Marshall, what was needed to make the Constitution a document that could be respected by all Americans?

  9. MexicanDude says:

    Would the U.S. Constitution be getting in the way if World Government was what you were planning?

    If it was,...and I'd say it definitely is a problem if you wanted World Government, and so would National Sovereignty of all Nations, but the U.S. Constitution is a major stumbling block if World Government was what you wanted to achieve.

    All those rights, and freedoms afforded to the People.
    All those limitations to Government being able to do what they wanted.

    The U.S. Constitution is clearly not desirable if your aim is to have a World Government.

    Now is it?

  10. Sir fliesalot says:

    For more than 200 years, the Electoral College had been part of the U.S. Constitution. It is the name given to the group of electors chosen in each state in the November voting, and who actually elect the President and the Vice President every four years. Article II, Section 1, Clause 3 is where the details of the Electoral College are contained at. It is viewed as a legitimate method in presidential elections, while it is also viewed as a problematic method. The proposition “Resolved, that the Electoral College should be eliminated.” causes both sides to passionately argue about its role in the United States’ presidential election.

    Do you agree or disagree with this proposition mentioned above? Explain your answer(s).

  11. Johnky J says:

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort - Article 3, Section 3 U.S. Constitution.

  12. lildevilgurl152004 says:

    Most Honorable Delegates,
    I recommend that you tell the state leaders that these three weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation must be addressed. They require a new plan for government. The three greatest weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation are the following: The government does not have an executive branch, each state only has one vote in the legislative branch, and the government does not have a separate judicial branch.
    •Tell them the first one is a problem because when congress passed a law, the state governments were supposed to enforce it. Congress had no power to make sure each state enforced the law. The second one is a great problem because states with larger populations like Virginia do not think its fair to have the same amount of power as a state with fewer people. The third one is also a struggle because if a laws meaning is in question there is no one who could fairly settle the issue and make sure all states follow the ruling.
    •Preamble to the U.S. Constitution
    •"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
    This is how I would rewrite this Preamble so that other people can understand it.

    People develop the government and the government exists for the people
    There needs to be a better way for us to solve things without states going to war with each other a good government would require a strong but fair system of justice. Maintain peace within the nation we need a military that can protect all states. The government is necessary to keep order. The new government would protect liberties not just in there lives but for future generations as well.
    Sincerely,

  13. United says:

    * Apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner

    * Have a social security number issues from a state he never lived in.

    * Preside over a cut to the credit rating of the United States.

    * Violated the War Powers Act.

    * Be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf.

    * Defy a federal judge's court order to stop implementing 0bamaCare.

    * Arbitrarily Declare an existing law unconstitutional and then refuse to enforce it.

    * Tell a private corporation what state they can build a factory in.

    * Go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and wednesday night parties for his friends; paid for by the tax payers.

    * Require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party, a violation of the U.S. constitution.

    * Spend close to 1 trillion on phantom shovel-ready jobs.

    * Recommend changing the national anthem claiming it promotes violence.

    * Cancel the national day of prayer breakfast

    * Abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters while screwing bond holders.

    * Threaten insurance companies if they publicly blame 0bamacare for rate increases.

    * Appoint 45 Czars to replace elected officials without congressional oversight.

    * Win a peace prize in the beginning of his first term for doing absolutely nothing.

  14. gail C says:

    If a court orders child support to be paid and does not to take into consideration the impact on other children in the family (regardless of order ob birth) or if the other children are provided the same level of support, has the court violated the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?

    “ All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. ”

    Example: A non-custodial parent is ordered to pay $850 per month for one child. The non-custodial parent, who has always paid, has never been late, tries to maintain a healthy relationship with their child, remarries and has three more children. The custodial parent, by virtue of moving to a state with a higher cost of living, takes the non-custodial parent back to court to modify child support based on the new state guidelines. The new state increases the obligation to $1420 per month and states that "it doesn't matter how many children you have, your going to support this child first." This new support order lowers the standard of living for the non-custodial parent, spouse and other children. Because the court chose not to award hardship deductions for the other children, has the court violated their rights to equal protection under the law?
    First paragraph should read:

    If a court orders child support to be paid and does not to take into consideration the impact on other children in the family (regardless of order of birth) or if the other children are not provided the same level of support because the support obligation does not consider their needs, has the court violated the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?
    In my specific case, being in the military, I moved as well. The military lawyer told me I couldn't fight the change of jurisdiction when I lived outside the state she moved to which was bad advice and wrong. A few years later, I was stationed in the state that she moved to which is when she filed for a change in jurisdiction. My crappy lawyer didn't fight the change even though I am not a resident of that state and allowed it to happen. I now no longer live in that state and when I called the legislative review branch to ask this very question, they told me that because I was a resident of a different state, it should be handled in federal court. While I appreciate your comments concerning venue / jurisdiction, you didn't address the question of "Equal Protection." Thanks for the input and support of fathers.

  15. lildevilgurl152004 says:

    The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees...

    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

    The Internet is the papers and effects of the citizens of the modern age. It is a medium of private communication. Law enforcement officials, by law, are required to have reasonable cause first, and request a warrant, before searching and 'seizing' said 'papers' and effects.

    If a citizen of the United States is not the target of a warrant, then the FBI has NO right to search or seize; and hence, no license to go fishing.

    In fact, those FBI agents took an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

    Are they just liars?

  16. che-che says:

    China and India as well as many Corporations were allowed funnel money anonymously through the United States Chamber of Commerce for Republicans. In January, they will want immediate return for their investment. Among their demands is to have even more U.S. Jobs shipped overseas.

  17. sarmosch says:

    yes I'll have one coffee with cream, two sugars, a popcorn, sprinkles, copy of the US Constitution on human skin, and a Dr Pepper please

  18. I Pledge Allegiance To The Flag Of The United States Of America And To The Republic For Which It Stands

  19. maras dan says:

    On Federal Policy: K-12 Issues in Mix as State Legislatures Wrap Up

  20. alvarol uema says:

    by Amir TaheriThis is a review of the book Should Israel Exist? A Sovereign Nation under Attack by the International Community by Michael Balfour Books, 2012. 352 pp.Imagine if someone suggested that you should read a book that discusses whether or not Norway, or the United States for that matter, should exist. You would be shocked or at least surprised that anyone would want to

Post a Comment