Who Left Who?

I was thinking about Secession today.  And I started parsing to true meaning of the word.

se·ces·sion [si sésh'n] noun:
A formal withdrawal from an organization, state, or alliance.

In this case we are pondering the Session of States.  From what?  From the United States of America.  So what is the United States of America?  Exactly what would the hypothetical State be seceding from?

The United States of America is a collection of independent sovereign states under the mutually agreed upon governance of a Constitution. This Constitution creates a Federal governing body that presents a common and united face to nations outside the group and also governs the commerce between the States so as to maintain equality in economic and judicial interactions.

But mostly the Constitution establishes what the Federal body can not do.  It protects the Sovereignty of the States and the individual citizens above all.

The United States of America are united because they agree to and follow the Constitution of the United States.  Secession is the act of rejecting that Constitution and the States that are still adhering to it.

It is at this point that I would like to put forth the theory that Secession has already happened.  Let's look at the poster child for Secession, Texas.  In the recent months bills declaring the refusal to follow Federal Laws and Programs such as Gun Control, the TSA, NDAA and ObamaCare have all found their way into the Texas State Legislature.  On the face of it these look like very rebellious actions.  Surely these Texan upstarts are ready to tear down the Stars and Stripes and start lobbing shells over the New Mexico border.

But look again. Gun Control, the TSA, NDAA and ObamaCare are all unconstitutional.  Each of them is a blatant violation of the common document that binds the individual States together.  By considering these laws, Texas is reasserting their belief and adherence to the Constitution of the United States.

In view of that, what are we to make of States that embrace these unconstitutional laws?  New York is not only embracing these laws but adding to them in onerous ways.  New York has made it clear that it holds the Constitution of the United States in contempt  and wants no part of it.  New York has rejected the document that binds the individual States together to form the United States of America.

I contend that New York has already Seceded from the Union by rejecting the Constitution.

The Union was created by the Constitution.  You can not be part of the Union while rejecting the Constitution.  The Liberal run states that have rejected the Constitution and then accuse the Conservative States of being in defiance of the American people.

We have not left the blessed Constitutional Union, they have.

Total Power in a Few Simple Steps

Let's pretend that you are amazingly wise and intelligent and have the answers to all of society's problems.  As a man like that, you should be in charge of everything, right? Right.  So how does one rule all that they survey with complete and benevolent power? You'll need a plan.  And you are lucky, I have one.  Not that I had ever thought I needed total power and control, honest.

You'll need a lot of followers.  They don't need to have any particular skills or real focus, this is a Democratic Republic.  These useful unusefuls are called voters.  Voters are easiest gotten when you have something to offer them. (Note: 'Offer' and 'Give' are two very different words.)  Rich folk don't need anything and the middle class can never agree on what they want as a homogenous group.  That leaves the poor.  They're pretty easy to placate, just offer them money, it doesn't even have to be yours.

To win elections you'll need a lot of poor.  Don't sweat this, poor are easy to make.  Just 'fix' the economy like a dirty auto mechanic.  The poor don't know how this whole magical economy thing works.  If they did they wouldn't be poor, would they?  While you're breaking the economy keep blaming the Other Guy.  With a little luck, a handful of middle classers will believe you and fall in with the growing ranks of poor.

It only takes 51%, that's a Mandate for you.  You're the Answer to All of Society's Problems. Once you're in you'll find that you have considerably less power than you thought you'd have.  There is still work to do.  The poor will start noticing they're still poor.  This needs to be dealt with first.  Blame the rich and promise to make them poor too.  For some reason this works better than promising to make everyone rich, go figure.

Take the money you were promising the poor and put it to something more useful like bullets and armored personnel carriers.  Trust me, you'll need these later. Then drop subtle hints that the poor should get unruly. When things get heated and chaotic announce that there are too many guns.  People hate being shot at and will give you the guns, especially the poor.

Secretly turn up the heat again and bring the country to a boil.  Then move in with all those armored carriers and bullets while suspending to Constitution for the sake of peace.  There will be a lot of resistance from the silly jingoistic nationalist patriots, but what are they going to do? Throw rocks?

Now you have all the power you deserved from the beginning.  You also have a broken economy, civil unrest and at least 51% of your citizens being a financial drain not a asset.  So you have one last step to set things right and seal your position as Ruler Over All You Survey.

Kill the poor.

Its About Love

The words 'hate' and 'chicken sandwich' have seen a lot of press lately.  Understandably so, they are a startling juxtaposition of ideas.  However, I feel that the point has been entirely missed with Mr. Carly's support of traditional marriage and the feelings of those who side with him and his delicious chicken sandwiches.

You see, it's not about hate.  It's about love.

We don't hate homosexuals. By 'we' I mean the majority of those of us who strongly support traditional marriage instead of a new definition that allows same sex couples.  Yes, there are a few true bigots out there – but they are by far the exception and not the rule.

We don't hate homosexuals, nor do we desire to stop them from having meaningful relationships with their peers.  This is not the conflict. We may disagree with the homosexual lifestyle on religious grounds, but that same religion insists that we love all God's children regardless of their burdens in this life.  Hate the sin, love the sinner.  It's not a sound bite, it's the true attitude of most Christians.

It's not about hate, its about love.

I love my wife.  I love my wife and the relationship I have with her framed by the sacred covenant of marriage as instituted by a loving God.  I love the life changing power and joy that comes from the give and take between me, my wife and God as we use this sacred binding to bring children into this world into a loving family.

I love the overwhelming glimpse of eternity that comes from the bond between generations knit together by solemn vow and fervent promise to hold and to cherish each other and to give everything, including our very lives if we have to, for the children we are given.  Just like our parents did for us and each other.

My marriage is not a mere piece of paper with an authorized signature and a government letter head.  It is not a tax filing status.  It is not authorized or created by any sovereign power on Earth.  It is merely recognized by them.  God made my marriage real and binding. The marriage certificate only made it public record.

When a same sex couple wants to apply the name 'marriage' to any government sanctioned contract between them, they change the meaning of the word itself.  This new definition of marriage is devoid of sacredness and does not in anyway reflect the covenants made between a Man and a Woman and their God to create new life and build a family.

They take something special and irreplaceable from my marriage to my wife.  The idea of our marriage is cheapened and tarnished.  It becomes less than it formally was.

The problem comes from homosexual individuals trying to walk one path to a entirely different destination.  Every path taken leads somewhere.  The more different the path, the more different the final destination.

When an individual chooses to walk the path of the homosexual lifestyle, they chose to walk towards its final destination.  If one chooses to walk a path of heterosexual marriage and take the covenants that it entails, they choose it's final destination also.

You can not travel the homosexual path and arrive at the heterosexual destination.  No matter what words you twist and violate to describe the achieved goal, it will never be true marriage, the path will not allow it.

Like it or not, marriage is by definition a religious covenant. I can say with complete confidence that no one supporting same sex marriage would think that a Muslim should be able to perform their daily prayers in a Jewish synagogue or that a Catholic should be able to serve communion in a Baptist church when ever they wanted to. It would be correctly seen as an assault on the religious liberties of the other believer. No one would say that the Muslim was being oppressed because he couldn't pray in the synagogue.

Marriage is a sacred rite and covenant to every Judeo-Christian sect known to man. Almost all of those sects agree that homosexuality is incompatible with the marriage covenant. It is not oppressive to say that homosexuals do not have the right to force themselves into that rite of worship, completely dismissing all the dearly held traditions of the very people who first practiced the sacrament of marriage.

It's not about hate.  It's about love.  The love I have for my wife and my marriage is too important to allow it to be transmuted into an empty and hollow facade of a once sacred institution.  I'm not fighting to stop the relationship between others who feel differently than me. I'm fighting to save the most important thing in my life, my marriage.