The First Amendment

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

A lot of people have issued opinions on what the above paragraph actually means. The majority of the opinions, including those psychotic ramblings from the Warren court, have been agenda driven. So, let’s take a look at the words from outside the box. The English language, especially during the late 1700’s was direct and to the point. If you approach a statement written by a personality such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison or John Adams with the assumption that these men were not writing in code, but wishing to make their intention as clear as possible, you are most likely going to wind up exactly where they were.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,”
During the time of the American Revolution, England had a state religion, the Church of England, established by King Henry the 8th for the sole purpose of allowing the King to divorce and remarry. The writers of our constitution wanted to ensure that Congress could not do what Henry did. They understood that a theocracy and freedom were incompatible concepts.

“or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
They also understood that in order to be truly free, the citizens of this new nation had to be allowed to worship as they saw fit. The Puritans and the Quakers of Pennsylvania were the last to sign off on this concept. They saw groups such as the Anabaptists and the Catholics as heretics and wanted nothing more than to tell them how to pray properly. We have much the same attitude going on today, but it is groups such as People for the American Way, the ACLU, NOW, and other atheistic organizations clamoring to remove that right. To them, all they see is the first half of the sentence. Whether they choose to agree or not, this statement is utterly true, it is not the American way to live without faith. The freedom to worship, or to not worship, as one sees fit, is one of the chief stones in the bedrock of our country’s foundation.

“or abridging the freedom of speech”
This is the big one that every armchair lawyer and their cousin quote, as if it is the only sentence within the amendment. You will notice that the writers of the constitution did not get to this portion until after they dealt with the freedom of religion. Sequence of thought is as important to the English language as is context. Being able to express oneself as a free citizen was important, just not as important as being able to worship without the government looking over your shoulder.

If you look at the letters of John Adams, Franklin, and the other founders, you will see them exercising this freedom with free flowing prose and quite often biting criticism. What you never see is the outrageous lie that today’s media and politicians are fond of using. Freedom of speech does not give us a right to lie. If Madison and his compatriots thought lies were a virtue, lying would have been mentioned. No, what is being said here is that congress cannot write a law that puts barriers in the way of Americans being able to voice their opinion in open and honest debate. When a citizen is sued over expressing an honest opinion or a student is either failed or thrown off a campus for being politically incorrect, those individuals’ rights have been “abridged”. In today’s language, they have been trampled upon. Political correctness is not American in any way shape or form and if the founding fathers were alive today, those who exercise political correctness would probably be tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail.

“or of the press;”
This portion is another sentence that many place over the religion clause, and again, you need to be cognizant of sentence structure. Regardless, the ability to report freely on what is happening, even if such reporting embarrasses the wealthy or the powerful, such reporting can not be constricted by any law. Those media heads that have fired writers and reporters because they have chosen to report the truth have violated this clause of the constitution. This clause does not give the media the right to lie. It is their duty to report the truth and to let the people choose what to believe. Many in today’s media would consider that an undue infringement on their freedoms.

“or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,”
Every 60’s radical, especially William Ayers, knows this clause. They quoted it ad nauseum while fling bottles, rocks, and fecal matter at the police during the Vietnam War era riots. A riot is not a peaceful assembly and therefore, by definition, is removed from the protection of the First Amendment. What the framers of our constitution had in mind was to prevent congress from being able to send troops to a gathering of townsfolk, whether it be in the village square or in a home to break up the meeting.

A meeting of employees in any given company to discuss whether or not they should create or join a union is covered under this right. Sending the boys out late at night to plant a burning cross onto someone’s lawn is not.

“and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
In my state of Nevada, I am ashamed to have been a member of the political party that has worked overtime to eliminate this right from Nevadans. The ability of the people to have a say in the fundamental decisions that affect their lives is, by its placement as the capstone in this amendment, one of the most important rights we have.

The current Assembly Minority Leader Heidi Gansert and the Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, worked together to craft a bill that greatly restricted the ability of an initiative petition to be approved for placement on the ballot in any given election. They did so under urging from the GOP party leadership because of the growing power of the Democrat party in the state’s two urban areas, Las Vegas and Reno. What was surprising is that the Democrat party leadership went right along with them, forming a Nevada version of the axis of evil.

We are seeing more and more moves in this direction and it is happening all across this nation in both local and national politics. The powerful elite in politics do not want the citizens of this country to have a voice. They care nothing for your wants, needs, desires or rights. What they want is for you to vote for them and to then shut up.

America needs to wake up. If the percentage of already registered voters who actually voted increased by only 25%, we would see a dramatic shift in the political picture of this country. If that percentage doubled, we would probably have begun the process of getting our country back. At the very least, the politicians would begin to listen.