Page 1 of 1

Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 11:58 am
by hank scorpio
Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be

ESCONDIDO, CA—Spurred by an administration he believes to be guilty of numerous transgressions, self-described American patriot Kyle Mortensen, 47, is a vehement defender of ideas he seems to think are enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and principles that brave men have fought and died for solely in his head.

Image
Kyle Mortensen would gladly give his life to protect what he says is the Constitution's very clear stance against birth control.

"Our very way of life is under siege," said Mortensen, whose understanding of the Constitution derives not from a close reading of the document but from talk-show pundits, books by television personalities, and the limitless expanse of his own colorful imagination. "It's time for true Americans to stand up and protect the values that make us who we are."

According to Mortensen—an otherwise mild-mannered husband, father, and small-business owner—the most serious threat to his fanciful version of the 222-year-old Constitution is the attempt by far-left "traitors" to strip it of its religious foundation.

"Right there in the preamble, the authors make their priorities clear: 'one nation under God,'" said Mortensen, attributing to the Constitution a line from the Pledge of Allegiance, which itself did not include any reference to a deity until 1954. "Well, there's a reason they put that right at the top."

"Men like Madison and Jefferson were moved by the ideals of Christianity, and wanted the United States to reflect those values as a Christian nation," continued Mortensen, referring to the "Father of the Constitution," James Madison, considered by many historians to be an atheist, and Thomas Jefferson, an Enlightenment-era thinker who rejected the divinity of Christ and was in France at the time the document was written. "The words on the page speak for themselves."

According to sources who have read the nation's charter, the U.S. Constitution and its 27 amendments do not contain the word "God" or "Christ."

Mortensen said his admiration for the loose assemblage of vague half-notions he calls the Constitution has only grown over time. He believes that each detail he has pulled from thin air—from prohibitions on sodomy and flag-burning, to mandatory crackdowns on immigrants, to the right of citizens not to have their hard-earned income confiscated in the form of taxes—has contributed to making it the best framework for governance "since the Ten Commandments."

"And let's not forget that when the Constitution was ratified it brought freedom to every single American," Mortensen said.

Mortensen's passion for safeguarding the elaborate fantasy world in which his conception of the Constitution resides is greatly respected by his likeminded friends and relatives, many of whom have been known to repeat his unfounded assertions verbatim when angered. Still, some friends and family members remain critical.

"Dad's great, but listening to all that talk radio has put some weird ideas into his head," said daughter Samantha, a freshman at Reed College in Portland, OR. "He believes the Constitution allows the government to torture people and ban gay marriage, yet he doesn't even know that it guarantees universal health care."

Mortensen told reporters that he'll fight until the bitter end for what he roughly supposes the Constitution to be. He acknowledged, however, that it might already be too late to win the battle.

"The freedoms our Founding Fathers spilled their blood for are vanishing before our eyes," Mortensen said. "In under a year, a fascist, socialist regime has turned a proud democracy into a totalitarian state that will soon control every facet of American life."

"Don't just take my word for it," Mortensen added. "Try reading a newspaper or watching the news sometime."

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/ar ... efender_of

8-)

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 12:03 pm
by Appaholic
It's so funny, because it's so true....

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 1:44 pm
by SuperHornet
As a conservative Christian, I agree that the Constitution guarantees us certain things that liberals are seeking to erode every day through legislation and activist courts stepping into the legislature's role. However, I don't believe that the Constitution says half the things this guy is purporting it to. Nut jobs like this guy give the conservative movement a bad name....

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:09 pm
by hank scorpio
SuperHornet wrote:As a conservative Christian, I agree that the Constitution guarantees us certain things that liberals are seeking to erode every day through legislation and activist courts stepping into the legislature's role. However, I don't believe that the Constitution says half the things this guy is purporting it to. Nut jobs like this guy give the conservative movement a bad name....
:rofl:

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:10 pm
by bandl
I can't tell.........which part of this thread is a joke and which isn't?

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:25 pm
by mainejeff
bandl wrote:I can't tell.........which part of this thread is a joke and which isn't?
I can't either. :|

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:38 pm
by CitadelGrad
Everyone knows that Jesus wrote the Constitution. Jeezus!

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:29 pm
by Ivytalk
The Onion! I knew it! :lol:

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:47 pm
by travelinman67
:ohno: SMFH...

The first two sentences in the Declaration of Independence...
hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
...no reference to God in the constitution, though referenced in 37 state's constitutions, and the leading sentences in the Declaration of Independence (as well as most of John Locke and Thomas Mason's force du majeur)

...dickhead Dems... :ohno:

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:56 pm
by bandl
THE ONION!!!!!

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:25 am
by GSUAlumniEagle
SuperHornet wrote:As a conservative Christian, I agree that the Constitution guarantees us certain things that liberals are seeking to erode every day through legislation and activist courts stepping into the legislature's role. However, I don't believe that the Constitution says half the things this guy is purporting it to. Nut jobs like this guy give the conservative movement a bad name....
Can't. Stop. Laughing. Please post often. You are my hero!

You do understand that legislature and "activist courts" were created by the Constitution, don't you? Are you really so naive to believe that the framers honestly believed that the Constitution could serve alone as the country's only founding document?
...no reference to God in the constitution, though referenced in 37 state's constitutions, and the leading sentences in the Declaration of Independence (as well as most of John Locke and Thomas Mason's force du majeur)

...dickhead Dems... :ohno:
Too bad the Declaration of Independence was never intended to be a governing document. The Constitution WAS intended to be a governing document. The framers, in their wisdom, declared that we shouldn't have a nationalized religion. http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:29 am
by dbackjon
Welcome GSUAlum

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:31 am
by bandl
THE ONION GODDAMMIT!

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:19 am
by BlueHen86
GSUAlumniEagle wrote:
SuperHornet wrote:As a conservative Christian, I agree that the Constitution guarantees us certain things that liberals are seeking to erode every day through legislation and activist courts stepping into the legislature's role. However, I don't believe that the Constitution says half the things this guy is purporting it to. Nut jobs like this guy give the conservative movement a bad name....
Can't. Stop. Laughing. Please post often. You are my hero!

You do understand that legislature and "activist courts" were created by the Constitution, don't you? Are you really so naive to believe that the framers honestly believed that the Constitution could serve alone as the country's only founding document?
...no reference to God in the constitution, though referenced in 37 state's constitutions, and the leading sentences in the Declaration of Independence (as well as most of John Locke and Thomas Mason's force du majeur)

...dickhead Dems... :ohno:
Too bad the Declaration of Independence was never intended to be a governing document. The Constitution WAS intended to be a governing document. The framers, in their wisdom, declared that we shouldn't have a nationalized religion. http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html
Good post. :thumb:

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:25 am
by danefan
Image

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:47 am
by andy7171
SuperHornet wrote:As a conservative Christian, I agree that the Constitution guarantees us certain things that liberals are seeking to erode every day through legislation and activist courts stepping into the legislature's role. However, I don't believe that the Constitution says half the things this guy is purporting it to. Nut jobs like this guy give the conservative movement a bad name....
:? :?

:rofl:

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:05 pm
by AZGrizFan
bandl wrote:THE ONION GODDAMMIT!

Give it up, man. They're on a roll. :ohno: :ohno: :ohno:

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:10 pm
by BlueHen86
AZGrizFan wrote:
bandl wrote:THE ONION GODDAMMIT!

Give it up, man. They're on a roll. :ohno: :ohno: :ohno:
Would that be an onion roll?

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:15 pm
by bandl
BlueHen86 wrote:
AZGrizFan wrote:

Give it up, man. They're on a roll. :ohno: :ohno: :ohno:
Would that be an onion roll?
HEYYYYYYYYYYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:23 pm
by AZGrizFan
bandl wrote:
BlueHen86 wrote:
Would that be an onion roll?
HEYYYYYYYYYYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
rimshot! :lol:

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:21 pm
by CitadelGrad
GSUAlumniEagle wrote:You do understand that legislature and "activist courts" were created by the Constitution, don't you? Are you really so naive to believe that the framers honestly believed that the Constitution could serve alone as the country's only founding document?
You do understand that the authors of the Constitution did not create activist courts, don't you? You do understand that the courts were intended to have very limited powers, don't you? You do understand courts were not intended to legislate or amend the Constitution, don't you? You do understand that the Constitution clearly separates powers between the three branches of the government, don't you? You do understand that there is a clearly described method for amending the Constitution and it is found withing the Constitution, don't you?

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:41 pm
by SuperHornet
CitadelGrad wrote:
GSUAlumniEagle wrote:You do understand that legislature and "activist courts" were created by the Constitution, don't you? Are you really so naive to believe that the framers honestly believed that the Constitution could serve alone as the country's only founding document?
You do understand that the authors of the Constitution did not create activist courts, don't you? You do understand that the courts were intended to have very limited powers, don't you? You do understand courts were not intended to legislate or amend the Constitution, don't you? You do understand that the Constitution clearly separates powers between the three branches of the government, don't you? You do understand that there is a clearly described method for amending the Constitution and it is found withing the Constitution, don't you?
#clap

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:03 pm
by CID1990
I think that the portion of the Declaration of Independence that refers to inalienable rights endowed by the Creator serves as a preamble to the idea that would later become the Constitution. The idea is an old one from the Enlightenment and it also has some Masonic roots, as well.

IN short, it means that human rights are neither granted nor guaranteed by government. The U.S. Constitution does not grant us any rights at all. The U.S. Constitution outlines those things that the U.S. Government cannot do. It is literally a document of limitation for our government. Too many people think that our rights are granted by the document itself, but this is a photonegative of the actual purpose and function.

In the 18th century (as well as before and after), certain human rights were considered to be sacrosanct and inviolable. These rights are afforded to us simply by the fact that we exist as human beings. Hence, the "endowed by our Creator" line. By saying that those rights were granted to us by God made them inviolable. This was the most powerful language available to the Founding Fathers. It is a statement of humanity, not religion.

I personally do not believe (as do many conservative constitutional scholars) that the U.S. Constitution is a contract with (or between) the Christian God and the American people. It is a contract that binds our government. Think of it as a "27 Commandments" to the government. With this in mind, I do not think that judicial rulings such as the ones that prohibit the Ten Commandments from being displayed in government buildings is an erosion of the document. Although somewhat miniscule, these rulings ARE in the spirit of the document. I think that it is a petty use of judicial time, but certainly not an attack on what is and always has been a secular Republic. In fact, in many ways, constitutional rulings that appear on the surface to be anti-religion are some of the more constitutionally sound decisions judges make. Quite frankly, if Detroit one day decides to put Koranic verses on courtroom walls (not impossible in say, 100 years given the growing demographics there) I would be raising Hell about it and I would be right. For the same reason that the atheists and the Hindus and the Secular Humanists are right when they raise Hell now.

When it comes to being upset about bending or trashing the COnstitution, I think we have many more glowing examples to worry about than supposed attacks on religion. Consfiscatory taxation, mandatory arrests for certain offenses, racial and gender discrimination through quotas, 'hate' crimes legislation, Federal enforcement of laws created extra-Constitutionally for issues reserved to the States, etc etc etc. These things are much more alarming to me than not being able to stop and ponder a plaque of the Ten Commandments in a courthouse lobby. I'm a practicing Christian, but I don't need a plaque to remind me of how to act, and I don't need revisionist reminders by people who think that the U.S. Constitution is a Christian document. It is Caesar's document.

I think most of the Founding Fathers would agree.


(Oh, and BTW- the article that started the thread is from The Onion.......lol)

Re: Area Man Passionate Defender Constitution

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:52 pm
by BlueHen86
CID1990 wrote:I think that the portion of the Declaration of Independence that refers to inalienable rights endowed by the Creator serves as a preamble to the idea that would later become the Constitution. The idea is an old one from the Enlightenment and it also has some Masonic roots, as well.

IN short, it means that human rights are neither granted nor guaranteed by government. The U.S. Constitution does not grant us any rights at all. The U.S. Constitution outlines those things that the U.S. Government cannot do. It is literally a document of limitation for our government. Too many people think that our rights are granted by the document itself, but this is a photonegative of the actual purpose and function.

In the 18th century (as well as before and after), certain human rights were considered to be sacrosanct and inviolable. These rights are afforded to us simply by the fact that we exist as human beings. Hence, the "endowed by our Creator" line. By saying that those rights were granted to us by God made them inviolable. This was the most powerful language available to the Founding Fathers. It is a statement of humanity, not religion.

I personally do not believe (as do many conservative constitutional scholars) that the U.S. Constitution is a contract with (or between) the Christian God and the American people. It is a contract that binds our government. Think of it as a "27 Commandments" to the government. With this in mind, I do not think that judicial rulings such as the ones that prohibit the Ten Commandments from being displayed in government buildings is an erosion of the document. Although somewhat miniscule, these rulings ARE in the spirit of the document. I think that it is a petty use of judicial time, but certainly not an attack on what is and always has been a secular Republic. In fact, in many ways, constitutional rulings that appear on the surface to be anti-religion are some of the more constitutionally sound decisions judges make. Quite frankly, if Detroit one day decides to put Koranic verses on courtroom walls (not impossible in say, 100 years given the growing demographics there) I would be raising Hell about it and I would be right. For the same reason that the atheists and the Hindus and the Secular Humanists are right when they raise Hell now.

When it comes to being upset about bending or trashing the COnstitution, I think we have many more glowing examples to worry about than supposed attacks on religion. Consfiscatory taxation, mandatory arrests for certain offenses, racial and gender discrimination through quotas, 'hate' crimes legislation, Federal enforcement of laws created extra-Constitutionally for issues reserved to the States, etc etc etc. These things are much more alarming to me than not being able to stop and ponder a plaque of the Ten Commandments in a courthouse lobby. I'm a practicing Christian, but I don't need a plaque to remind me of how to act, and I don't need revisionist reminders by people who think that the U.S. Constitution is a Christian document. It is Caesar's document.

I think most of the Founding Fathers would agree.


(Oh, and BTW- the article that started the thread is from The Onion.......lol)
Good post. :thumb: