Against the Weight of All the Evidence

    Falling back to a historically failed "age of reason", witnessed by those who gave us our Constitution, the judicial tyrants and the traitors in Congress now again egregiously call to situation and statistical ethics to justify their evil beliefs and positions. Against the weight of all the evidence to the contrary, our enemies absolutely depend on a public tolerance of their injustice to continue their assault on this "land of the free and the home of the brave". Just as those of the religion of Islam misjudged our resolve after 11 September, 2001, so we again must respond to the evil attacking us, so "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Abraham Lincoln, The Gettysburg Address, November 19, 1863.
Against the Weight of the Evidence
With Profound Contempt
excerpted from The Attack on America, 2nd Ed., Freedom Press, St. Louis, 2002
    When the impeached president left the highest office of "honor and trust" in our Federal government, the longer lasting effects of his treason did not end when he and his cronies sacked the White House. Failing to uphold his oath of office is paled in the light of his assault on the judicial system by destroying its foundation relying on the Truth. Perjury, held unaccountable by his fellow traitors in the U.S. Senate, not only negates a fundamental tenet of our republican democracy – "justice for all", but signaled the much more devastating consequences now surfacing. Lies and deceptions, along with tolerance, aid and abet the enemies of justice. To regain our freedom and secure its blessings, loyal Americans can not afford to languish in the lost security attending the sale of national security information to the Chinese or the devastation of the military vital to peace through strength. We must focus on the attack on America that is on-going, here, and now.


    Some have called the use of the words: treason, traitors, espionage, sabotage, propaganda, evil, and the like, too strong. Using the definition of treason against our government being "… any act that seeks to overthrown the governments formed under and defined by the original intention of the Constitution of the United States of America", places such words in the proper perspective. It is only in Truth that all humanity shall be set free. The evidence of our enemies' error abounds, and the apathy and indifference of those resting in their abundance persists.


    With one of the legacies of the assault on the judicial system from a prior administration, sitting on the highest court in the land, discussing using common law from a foreign country to give grounds to her flawed opinion in the recent Supreme Court case of LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS, while completely ignoring the very words of the Framers, evidence of her allegiance to one of the multitude of the religions of humanism is overwhelming and preponderant. When so-called "liberals" subvert the intention of the Constitution in the Senate filibusters trashing the nominations of righteous and Godly jurists to the Federal benches, we cannot, and must not, ignore our responsibility to protect and defend the Constitution from these traitors. To do so in any measure perpetuates the injustice, and promises the destruction of this one Nation under God. That phrase, one Nation under God, is the target of all ideologies seeking to decimate our supreme order of law. Defining the foundation of our freedom bound by justice for all, as intended by those who conceived and gave birth to these United States of America, allows any loyal American to identify our enemies. Evidence of the Truth is so apparent, so documented in the public record, and so visible in the entire natural order, that only by ignoring the reality surrounding us are the forces of evil able to proceed in their attack on America.


    Falling back to a historically failed "age of reason", witnessed by those who gave us our Constitution, the judicial tyrants and the traitors in Congress now again egregiously call to situation and statistical ethics to justify their evil beliefs and positions. Against the weight of all the evidence to the contrary, our enemies absolutely depend on a public tolerance of their injustice to continue their assault on this "land of the free and the home of the brave". Just as those of the religion of Islam misjudged our resolve after 11 September, 2001, so we again must respond to the evil attacking us, so "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Abraham Lincoln, The Gettysburg Address, November 19, 1863.


    The abundance, overwhelming character, preponderance, and indisputable nature of the evidence of the failed conclusions of the humanist mind, as well as their flawed conclusions of law, all fall back to the misinterpretation of intention of founding generation and their beliefs, faith if you will, based more on the reality of history than on any particular religious tradition. Most certainly, we were conceived as a Christian nation. That truth does not imply a religious connotation as those promoting their own various false religions would have us believe, but rather an almost universal acceptance of the teachings of one Man, Jesus bar Joseph of Nazareth. Questioning that fact constitutes the grounds and institutes the error on which freedom is lost and justice for all is denied. History is a validation of Truth, where the facts of the past are unable to be changed by the prejudices and special interests arising from humanity's failed intention or invention. Time, itself confirms the absolute of Law borne witness to in the immutable natural order and in repetitive human behavior.
    "I should first take a general view of the moral doctrines of the most remarkable of the ancient philosophers, of whose ethics we have sufficient information to make an estimate, say of Pythagoras, Epicurus, Epictetus, Socrates, Cicero, Seneca, Antoninus. I should do justice to the branches of morality they have treated well; but point out the importance of those in which they are deficient. I should then take a view of the deism and ethics of the Jews, and show in what a degraded state they were, and the necessity they presented of a reformation. I should proceed to a view of the life, character, & doctrines of Jesus, who sensible of incorrectness of their ideas of the Deity, and of morality, endeavored to bring them to the principles of a pure deism, and juster notions of the attributes of God, to reform their moral doctrines to the standard of reason, justice & philanthropy, and to inculcate the belief of a future state." – Jefferson's letter to Dr. Priestley, Washington, April 9, 1803


    Condensed into the writings of Justice Joseph Story, referred to by many as the "father of American jurisprudence, are uncounted statements evincing the faith of our Fathers – the political philosophy that is the foundation and basis of the political thought culminating in the Constitution. It is extremely important, and entirely relevant, that under our system of government that it is the intention of the lawmakers which must control any interpretation of our law. With the Constitution binding all other law, U.S. Const., Art. VI, it is paramount and critical to our very survival as a nation, that the original intention of the Framers be upheld. Absent protecting and defending their vision derived from the Truth, our children and their children will exist under a government void of the blessings of liberty and justice for all.


    Justice Story was appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison, the "architect" of the Constitution. Personally familiar with those whose deliberations gave us "the supreme law of the land", he speaks with an authority commanded only by the Framers themselves. Whether in ignoring the words of those who gave birth to our government, or disputing any other historically validated source, it is against the weight of all the evidence, that the traitors must launch their attack. Concisely, in his "A Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States", the justice speaks.
§440. The first amendment is, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; …
§441. The same policy, which introduced into the Constitution the prohibition of a religious test, led to the more extended prohibition of any religious test, led to the more extended prohibition of the interference of Congress in religious concerns. We are not to attribute this prohibition of a national religious establishment to an indifference to religion in general, and especially to Christianity, (which none could hold in more reverence, than the framers of the Constitution,) but to dread by the people of the influence of ecclesiastical power in matters of government; a dread which their ancestors brought with them from the parent country, and which, unhappily for human infirmity, their own conduct, after their emigration, had not, in any just degree, tended to diminish. It was also obvious, from the numerous and powerful sects existing in the United States, that there would be perpetual temptations to struggles for ascendancy in the National councils, if any one might thus be introduced, to an extent utterly subversive of the true interests and good order of the Republic. The most effective mode of suppressing evil, in the view of the people, was, to strike down the temptations of its introduction.
§442. … Indeed, the right of a society or government to interfere in matters of religion, will hardly be contested by any persons, who believe that piety, religion, and morality are intimately connected with the well being of the state, and indispensable to the administration of civil justice. The promulgation of great doctrines of religion, the being, and attributes, and providence of one Almighty God; the responsibility to Him of our actions, founded upon moral accountability; a future state of rewards and punishments; the cultivation of all the personal, social, and benevolent virtues; – these never can be a matter of indifference in any well-ordered community. It is, indeed, difficult to conceive, how any civilized society can well exist without them. And, at all events, it is impossible for those who believe in the truth of Christianity; as a Divine revelation, to doubt, that it is the especial duty of government to foster, and encourage it among all the citizens and subjects. This is a point wholly distinct from that of the right of private judgment in matters of religion, and of the freedom of public worship, according to the dictates of one's own conscience.
§443. The real difficulty lies in ascertaining the limits, to which government may rightfully go, in fostering and encouraging religion… (CftC note: Justice Story supposes three cases affording various possibilities to individual State governments, all of which deal specifically with the Christian religion and it's promulgation)….
§444. Probably, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the State, so far as such encouragement was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.


    Many times over, and in many diverse applications, he clarifies the Founders intention.
§ 400. I. The first and fundamental rule in the interpretation of all instruments is, to construe them according to the sense of the terms, and the intention of the parties. Mr. Justice Blackstone has remarked, that the intention of a law is to be gathered from the words, the context, the subject matter, the effects and consequence, or the reason and spirit of the law. He goes on to justify the remark by stating, that words are generally to be understood in their usual and most known signification, not so much regarding the propriety of grammar, as their general and popular use; that if words happen to be dubious, their meaning may be established by the context, or by comparing them with other words and sentences in the same instrument; that illustrations may be further derived from the subject-matter, with reference to which the expressions are used; that the effect and consequence of a particular construction is to be examined, because, if a literal meaning would involve a manifest absurdity, it ought not to be adopted; and that the reason and spirit of the law, or the causes, which led to its enactment, are often the best exponents of the words, and limit their application. Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States
    "That the “spirit of the law” be considered in interpreting the Constitution does not mean that the Constitution itself should be “rewritten” as society evolves. In fact, saying that the Constitution is a “living” document is a misnomer that defeats the purpose of the document, which is to be the standard against which all laws are measured. A standard cannot change; only the facts to which it is applied do. What is, therefore, the “spirit” of the Establishment and Free Exercise clause? By studying the arguments ardently presented by those whose religious liberty was at stake, the “spirit” was to prohibit the legislative declaration of a national church, to keep the legal institutions of church and state separate so that there would be no religious “test” to run for or hold public office, and to prohibit religious taxation of people who were not represented within the denomination imposing the tax. Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992), 263
    In Story's view and that of the Framers, their (the Framers') view, is that their intention shall never change, and cannot based on Truth and the historical reality, for it would relegate the Constitution to the category of any other law invented by humanity to support their selfish, humanist, and hedonist agendas. Any absolute or immutable law, as the Constitution is, except as modified under Article V, can be applied today to a myriad of scenarios regardless of the particular facts of the case, unconstrained by time, itself, or distorted by false religions or philosophies. To promote the misinterpretation recently visited on it by the judicial tyrants requires a manifest absurdity. This Committee for the Constitution suggests that there is no better guide to the Constitutional meaning than early jurisprudence, particularly when obtained from those intimately aware of the legislators, both in person, and concerning their intention and beliefs, legislative enactments, and the plain, ordinary meaning of words within their cultural contexts. "What is the meaning of is?" is but one poignant example of the perversion entertained by the jurists with which the traitors in the Senate seek to populate the benches of justice. These acts against the Constitution exist apart from their own failure to administer justice. This says nothing of Congress's consummate failure to protect the Constitution from judicial tyranny under the authority and responsibility vested in them by the Constitution, Article III, Section 2, paragraph 2. In addition, it is fact, that those who fail in protecting and defending the supreme law violate their oath of office. 


    Not isolated to the writings of early jurists, and members of the early Congresses, the public record abounds with, and is replete with unequivocal evidence of their original intention. One of the most scholarly treatises on the religious establishment clause is found on the Internet, with abundant resources, bibliographies, and links. The Texas decision ultimately returns to this issue.


“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports . . .

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion . . . 

. . . reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle”

from President Washington's Farewell Address to Congress

    Because of the courts' and legislatures' failure to protect and defend the Constitution, against the weight of all the evidence, not just the overwhelming and preponderance of the evidence, but all the evidence, we hold those failing to uphold their oath of office in the utmost and complete contempt.


    May God bless America, and, as one of our subscribers very wisely said, "May America bless God", referring, of course, to our choosing to be obedient to His absolute and immutable Law for our behavior, whether we acknowledge its Source or not.