Speaking of unalienable rights, the GOP’s handling of the Kagan nomination thus far offers new evidence that the Party’s current leadership remains obtusely indifferent to the tragic watershed Kagan’s nomination represents for the American republic. In response to a question from Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, she refused to support the fundamental notion that all people have unalienable rights. With the deceitful pseudo-cleverness now characteristic of those hostile to the principles of the Constitution, she pretended that as a Supreme Court justice she would be obliged to deal only with the rights enumerated in the Constitution.
Of course this seemingly astute maneuver simply confirms her incompetent or willful ignorance of the Constitution’s provisions. The ninth amendment clearly states that “the enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Unless Kagan intends simply to ignore this provision of the Constitution (as she and her boss have ignored such provisions as the one that prescribes the eligibility requirements for the Presidency), she cannot pretend that as a Supreme Court justice she would have no Constitutionally prescribed duty to consider and safeguard the rights retained by the people.
What are those rights? What is their basis? By what reasoning can the nature and substance of such rights be ascertained? Because of the ninth amendment, answering these questions is part of the duty of a Supreme Court Justice. Kagan claims to know nothing of this duty, and openly states that she will not fulfill it. This alone disqualifies her from service on the Supreme Court.
As part of the organic law of the United States, the Declaration of Independence offers a definitive guide for the thinking required to answer these questions. Its words summarize the doctrine of unalienable rights, derived from the will of the Creator, whom it also describes as the Supreme Judge of the universe. Kagan and her cronies in the Obama faction have discarded this doctrine, and with it the reasonable foundation for the idea of government based on the consent of the governed. But this is the form of government the Constitution establishes, and which by Article IV, Section 4 all the branches of the U.S. government are obliged to preserve in the United States.
Kagan and the rest of the Obama faction are clearly and openly committed to overturning this form of government, which they deem inadequate for the implementation of their totalitarian socialist agenda. What sense does it make to say that an enemy of the form of government the Constitution establishes is qualified to serve as a justice of on the Supreme Court? Are there no GOP Senators who care enough about the preservation of self-government at least to make the effort to educate the American people about the fundamental threat to liberty Kagan’s elevation to the Supreme Court involves?
Any GOP Senator who does not join to filibuster Kagan’s nomination proves by this fact that they are either incompetent to understand the threat or in complicity with those who pose it. In addition to calling public attention to the profound rejection of America’s heritage Kagan represents, a GOP filibuster will buy time for people around the country to act in defense of their unalienable rights, pressuring their Senators to say no to a nominee who disparages the rights the Constitution plainly says we are to retain.
The Tenth Amendment has been rediscovered. Now we need a Ninth Amendment movement to rediscover the truth that the Constitution, by its own words, is not self-sufficient. Without the Declaration, and the doctrine of unalienable rights it proclaims, the people must lose all sense of where their rights come from, what they are, and how they are retained. With their filibuster of the Kagan nomination, GOP Senators could start such a movement. Do they have the wisdom? Do they have the competence? Do they have the guts?
Related posts:
![Recommend [loyaltoliberty]](http://s3.amazonaws.com/arkayne-media/img/badge/logo-recommend-badge-medium.png){kind=icon}
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
I would not dismiss out of hand the nomination of Kagan the Pagan simply because she has not had experience in a courtroom. Surely there are qualified individuals who teach constitutional law who have not spent a career on the bench, oftentimes at the political behest of their benefactors.
However, there is enough evidence to show she is an idealogue who has only a “living document” mentality who is either unwilling or unable to accept natural rights (ie the 2d amendment and self-preservation) that preceed our constitution. Not only is she anathema to our republican form of government, but the GOP is complicit in this travesty; just watch and see.
I didn’t mention the deathocrats for obvious reasons.
Dr. Keys,
When you deny unalienable rights you are in essence denying the creator. I think it is fair to say that everyone in the Obama administration are deniers of Jesus Christ or else they would not be there. If you don’t know the Lord you cannot possibly understand the concept of unalienable rights.
Where there is no understanding of unalienable rights there will be no liberty. American has turned its back on God and as a result our rights and liberties are now gone.
Should Kagin be confirmed? My first response is why not; have we not gone so far to the left that all is lost? My second thought is that we must stand and fight and win the hearts and minds of those around us one at a time until we overcome.
Your message continues to be so important, how can we help get it out?
At one point Time.com had an article that explained that one of the cases she worked in front of the Supreme Court was lost by a 9-0 vote … I haven’t been able to find it since … but this means that not only is she radical … KAGIN IS MORE RADICAL THAN JUSTICE GINSBERG … and THAT would ALSO mean that she is FAR FROM “MAINSTREAM” JUDICIAL THOUGHT ! Add that to her lack of actual judicial experience and her apparent vacillations concerning the Second Ammendment and she is a Constitutional disaster waiting to happen.