Memorial Day and the Constitution

[richlevy]

This is an answer to Ibram from here. It got a bit off topic so I'm giving it its own thread.

Originally Posted by Ibram

UG likes it?

I'll be sure to steer clear.

Well, UG and I are polar opposites in our politics, but both agree on some fundamentals. The U.S. Constitution is one of the greatest documents in human history. It's existence is the reason we on the Cellar can say anything in a free forum uncensored by our government.

When I was in college, I took an ROTC course. It was in an area I found interesting but nobody offered on the civilian side. As a result, I ended up taking an oath to the Constitution. Which puts me in a minority that includes people who actually served in the military, guys like me who wandered in, naturalized US citizens, and some government officials. US citizens are never required to take an oath to the Constitution.

Now UG may share the opinion of this guy on Fox. I hope not. Personally, I think the guy on Fox is an asshat, but I do agree with him on one (and only one) point. The oath is and always will be to the Constitution. This is a protection from asshats like the articles author, who seems to have entirely missed the point. I remember someone on the Cellar mentioning 'the tragedy of the commons' and then completely twisting around its meaning. This guy is making a similar interpretation. I'd love to get a few drinks in him and see what he really thinks about Truman's order to desegregate the armed forces in 1948.

The point is that UG, I, and this asshat on Fox, can coexist in our society. We can even give these guys guns and trust them, even when they hate the President (Clinton), and even when they think they love the President (GWB as a sort of Ike Turner). Because all of us have our eyes, not on the President and not on the Bible, but on the Constitution.

The one thing that truly annoys me about the Pledge of Allegiance, other than that someone felt that they had to stick 'under G-d' in it to make us look less like the Soviets, is that I think it misses the point. We pledge allegiance 'to the flag'. The only mention of the Constitution is the inference in 'and to the Republic, for which it stands'.

Every single fucking nation on this planet has a flag, some of which are so blood soaked that their mere presence is a cause for emotional pain. Flags can represent honor and glory, or they can be the shit rags of history. Just like everyone has a mother, including serial killers and the dregs of humanity, so every country has a flag.

The flag is the wrapper, the Constitution is the gift. It was written by a bunch of rich, educated, dare I say liberal, elite who seized a colony from one of the most powerful countries in the world. They could have kept it for themselves, but they very carefully and painstakingly put together a document that not only gave power back to the people who actually sacrificed to win it, but set up a balance of power designed to keep that government in check and working towards the general welfare.

In the Constitution, a federalized army is seen as a necessary evil. The true reason for the 2nd amendment isn't to give an excuse for some idiot to own a gun he could never use for hunting unless the deer wore body armor, but to provide a safeguard against a military turned to oppose the people it was sworn to protect. The other safeguard is to have them swear their allegiance, not to the holder of any office, but to the Constitution itself. I don't know if we're now the only ones, but I'm guessing that at the time we had one of the first military forces in history whose allegiance was to an idea.

I respect anyone who served. I certainly respect the sacrifice they and their families made, even those who came back alive and in one piece, because of what they were sworn to protect. And this is why I, UG, and the asshat on Fox can coexist. Because all of us have our eyes on the same prize and are guaranteed its protection.

I borrowed the rifle creed of the US Marines and made a few modifications. I don't know if they will like it, but hey, it's a free country and that's the whole fucking point. Besides, if you're going to steal, then steal from the best.

So I'm offering up a creed that civilians and military can use. Hopefully something a little more substantial than flag magnets and ribbons.

This is my Constitution.
There are many like it, but this one is MINE.
My Constitution is my best friend. It is my life.
I must master it as I must master my life.
My Constitution without me is useless. Without my Constitution, I am useless.
I must exercise my Constitution true.
My Constitution and myself know that what counts is not the power we have,
the noise of our arguments, nor the rancor of our disagreement.
We know it is the freedoms that count. We will be free...
My Constitution is human, even as I, because it is my life.
Thus, I will learn it as a brother.
I will learn its weaknesses, its strengths, its clauses, its amendments,
its paragraphs, and its preamble.
I will ever guard it against the ravages of time and fools.
I will keep my Constitution ready, even as I am ready.
We will become part of each other. We will...
Before God I swear this creed.
My Constitution and myself are the defenders of my country.
We are the masters of our enemies.
We are the saviors of our freedoms.
So be it, until there is no enemy, but PEACE.

[DanaC]

The U.S. Constitution is one of the greatest documents in human history.

I would wholeheartedly agree with that statement.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I would wholeheartedly agree with that statement.

Thank you. Coming from a foreigner, and an Englishwoman to boot, it's great to hear.

BTW, this whole think reminds me of a class I took in syllogisms back in college.

Everyone on the Cellar thinks the Constitution is great
Everyone on the Cellar thinks UG is a jerk
UG is on the Cellar and thinks the Constitution is great
UG thinks he is a jerk


Now you know why I didn't go for my Masters.

[BigV]

Bravo, richlevy, bravo!

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by BigV

Bravo, richlevy, bravo!

Thanks, Big.

[piercehawkeye45]

I agree with a lot of this. The only problems I have is stopping at the constitution and not looking to make it better and forcing our constitution on other people. If someone else wants to have the same thing as us, let them adopt it, but I'll be damned if I'm going to say ours is the right way.

I also think that it is the a civilians biggest duty to be the fourth branch of the government. We should keep all the other branches in check.

Good job on the greed by the way.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Well said, Rich; I'm impressed. This is the kind of thing I read The Cellar -- or any other fairly brainy BBS -- for.

Though I don't know why you think that page is "on Fox" -- the only Fox mentioned thereon is one Colonel Wesley Fox.

I took that oath myself, and I do find it rather continues to inform my life and its philosophy to this day. Not bad for gov't issue.

Don't fret about "forcing" our constitution on anybody, Pierce: in the instances where it's been done, it's worked very well, to the prosperity and stability of the nations so forced. I think this is because our combination of political and economic liberty is not something unique to America -- we were just the first ones to do it -- but that it will work for any humans, anywhere, as long as other, more grasping, humans don't queer it for everyone.

My time on earth has given me more faith in democracy, liberty, and capitalism than you yet have, Pierce.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Well said, Rich; I'm impressed. This is the kind of thing I read The Cellar -- or any other fairly brainy BBS -- for.

Though I don't know why you think that page is "on Fox" -- the only Fox mentioned thereon is one Colonel Wesley Fox.

Thank you UG. And I was incorrect about Fox. This particular individual was on GOPUSA.com.

While some people might go 'same difference', it was incorrect. With a little more digging I'm sure I can find a Fox News connection, but the task would be pointless.

I find this part disturbing.

Keeping in mind their oath, which, by its very language specifies obligations to the Constitution and not necessarily to the sitting president, officers either ignored Clinton's directives or vocally confronted the damaging effect of his enduring loathing of the military.

He really does sound like the whiny bastards who didn't want Truman integrating the armed services. I wonder if he'll apply the same standard to officers who 'vocally confront' the president on Iraq.

If this guy is a homophobic idiot who doesn't like "don't ask, don't tell" then he should do us all a favor and out all of the gay soldiers in Iraq. I'm sure their family and friends would like to see the 5,000-15,000 men and women there come home. I'm also sure that they don't want to leave since each one of them has a 'get out of Iraq' ticket and has not used it. I'm also sure their immediate superiors and squad mates know and don't care.

Guys who think that duty and honor only apply to straight, (probably white), conservatives are stupid and, if their attitudes infect the chain of command, dangerous.

The only reason we can co-exist is because of one piece of paper written over 200 years ago. Amazing.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Don't fret about "forcing" our constitution on anybody, Pierce: in the instances where it's been done, it's worked very well, to the prosperity and stability of the nations so forced.

I wouldn't really consider Iraq a success...

I think this is because our combination of political and economic liberty is not something unique to America -- we were just the first ones to do it -- but that it will work for any humans, anywhere, as long as other, more grasping, humans don't queer it for everyone.

Most people do want what we have, I agree, but it is pointless to force it upon them if they do not want it because it will fail miserably. If they want what we have they can have it but we should never tell them what they want.

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

The only problems I have is stopping at the constitution and not looking to make it better ...

My problem with your problem is that once we open the door to changing the Constitution, we will most certainly screw it up. Who in Washington would you trust to change it? I wouldn't trust half the Senate to run a 7-11, I wouldn't trust 80% of the House of Representatives to run a lemonade stand and I wouldn't trust anyone in the White House to do anything.

But I agree with you on the problem of forcing our way on other countries. I think the criteria for deciding which nations to force it on seems a little suspicious. I don't think we choose by need as much/often as we choose by greed. And, let's face it: freedom ain't for everybody whether we like it or not.

And lastly, I'm late in saying what a magnificent post Rich has made. BigV beat me to it.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Beestie

My problem with your problem is that once we open the door to changing the Constitution, we will most certainly screw it up. Who in Washington would you trust to change it? I wouldn't trust half the Senate to run a 7-11, I wouldn't trust 80% of the House of Representatives to run a lemonade stand and I wouldn't trust anyone in the White House to do anything.

But I agree with you on the problem of forcing our way on other countries. I think the criteria for deciding which nations to force it on seems a little suspicious. I don't think we choose by need as much/often as we choose by greed. And, let's face it: freedom ain't for everybody whether we like it or not.

Great points! Bottom line is that the Govenment decides who they are going to force their policies on based on who and what party dominates the political top. Everyone of them does it to some other country. I say we cut off all aid to most of those shit holes and bring the bacon home to fix our own problems.

[piercehawkeye45]

I agree greatly Beestie but that doesn't mean we can talk about it and if a very large majority think that we can make an improvement, it can happen.

That sounds like a pipe dream though...

[richlevy]

The whole reason for the Amendment process is to allow for changes, even to the core of the Constitution and previous amendments.

For example, the 14th amendment said voters should be male and 21 or older.

The 15th amendment clarified that they could be any race.

The 19th amendment said that now they could be women.

The 24th clarified no poll tax could be collected.

..and the 26th amendment changed the voting age to 18, taking into consideration the fact majority of soldiers dying in service were unable to vote.

In some cases, amendments clarify existing assumptions or make new rules. In other cases, the amendments changed previous rules.

Here is a partial list of recently proposed amendments. Some of these amendments actually restrict existing rights (or the courts interpretation of these rights), while most expand rights.

[piercehawkeye45]

That sounds like a pipe dream though...

I take back my statement.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Beestie

My problem with your problem is that once we open the door to changing the Constitution, we will most certainly screw it up.

Originally Posted by richlevy

For example, the 14th amendment said voters should be male and 21 or older.
The 15th amendment clarified that they could be any race.
The 19th amendment said that now they could be women.
The 24th clarified no poll tax could be collected.
..and the 26th amendment changed the voting age to 18,

Proof positive Beestie was right.