Prompted by: Independence Day
Love it, hate it, or the many variations of liking it, this is where it all nationally started…
“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…” — United States Declaration of Independence
Quoted from a High Times magazine article describing one type of anti-cannabis group (and words that powerfully reverberate hauntingly)…
“The logic of their position is that the law is a tool to teach people right from wrong…”
After two centuries, that “logic” not only applies to people believing the demonstrably ineffective and destructive war on [some] drugs somehow sends the right message to children, but forms the overall prevailing (inter)national “wisdom”.
That highly questionable wisdom means we should ban ‘this and that’ to teach people right and wrong, and we should micro-ban ‘this and that’ (i.e. regulate ‘this and that’) for similar education. Since everyone has their opinion regarding right and wrong, “We the people” are left with an overwhelmingly complex rule-of-law (over 70,000 pages of federal regulations alone), so a perpetual judicial war to define liberty with all of the “collateral damage” spanning widespread nationally.
Actual logic counters such “wisdom”. Despite outright judicial dismissal of the fact, our fundamental rights (based upon those famous words) cannot be infringed upon by the “consent of the governed”. Once that infringement happens (and it obviously has with explicit approval by the supreme opinion of our judicial branch), the unalienable property of liberty has no real strength, so we become yet another nation in which liberty is defined by elitism and all of the favoritism naturally forming that definition (even against public safety, as history often reveals).
“We the people” went from this…
“The First through Eighth Amendments address the means by which the federal government exercises its enumerated powers, while the Ninth Amendment addresses a ‘great residuum’ of rights that have not been ‘thrown into the hands of the government,’ as Madison put it.”
…to this…
“The Declaration of Independence…is not a legal prescription conferring powers upon the courts; and the Constitution’s refusal to ‘deny or disparage’ other rights is far removed from affirming any one of them, and even farther removed from authorizing judges to identify what they might be, and to enforce the judges’ list against laws duly enacted by the people.”
Despite overwhelmingly popular consensus to the contrary, the unalienable right to liberty is actual progressivism (while simultaneously being American conservatism, and obviously libertarianism).
Slavery, demeaning women, religiously defined liberty, and all other determinations by elitists via such ‘educational law’ (including that “duly enacted by the people”) existed before that fundamental right (and our nation) was established.
Had that right been immediately strictly implemented by (educational) judicial way of constitutional amendment nine…
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” — United States Constitution
…then by lawful necessity, slavery and any form of racism would have instantly ended, women would be treated equally, and all forms of discrimination on the basis of social retardation would never have become lawful (e.g. laws against the LGBT community, certain drug users, likely those against self-aware robots, etc.)
No generation has been perfect.
Our Founding Fathers/Mothers were powerfully dominated by pre-American conservatism spanning the political spectrum. They had to navigate ample hypocrisy (as we do today), and by using words such as “men” and “Creator” in conjunction with their failure to embrace modern sensibility against such socially retarded discrimination, they failed to remove liberty defined by elitism — that removal being the primary (and at least arguably sole) distinction of our “land of the free”.
Our nation has been agonizing (including the suffering of millions, if not billions, of non-violent people) over that horrible defeat for two centuries and counting increasingly discrediting our national integrity towards the next logical basis (unacceptable oppression) for a sadly new (and likely horribly violent) revolution to try again.
As someone living a painfully unique life (not by choice, but due to honestly “playing the hand I’ve been dealt”), I firmly believe that the unalienable right to liberty is critical towards innovative adaptation for societal survival and “thrival”, and if “We the people” fail to implement that right by law, then our national independence is still merely expressed in name and flag pattern only, while the Great Hypocrisy (spanning our national history and far more damaging than the Great Depression) still reigns supreme as the most serious danger against public safety — and sends the wrong ‘educationally lawful’ message to the children and everyone else celebrating an independence that has not yet been truly earned by any sound reasoning against the Great Hypocrisy.
Many people fought and died in the name of liberty — but so far — they’ve only died in the name of ‘liberty to do whatever the people in power tell you is okay’ through “educational law” determining “right” and “wrong” to elitist convenience.
As an American patriot, this situation is unacceptable, and this day will always symbolize my righteous demand for the judicial restoration of constitutional amendment nine to legally recognize the abuse of law is the most serious societal risk, so an actually unalienable right to liberty — the only logical defense against implementing abusive law — must be supremely constitutionally embraced without “slippery slope starting” exception. That demand has no leverage in the demonstrably severely corrupt judicial system honoring the Great Hypocrisy (including hypocritical laws “duly enacted by the people”), so must be repeatedly expressed in massaging waves of justice in the court of public opinion to persuade that true highest court to apply their undeniably dominant strength upon sufficient organization against corrupt elitists — yours truly prefers that dominance now be applied to non-violently diffuse the building (and too often broadly unreported) oppression by way of wildly uncontrollable “law” prior to the next revolutionary explosion.
Harm (and risk) cannot be lawfully defined by elitist concerns (including laws from passionate irrationality of the masses due to elitist scaremongering), but by continuously improving the best experimental (never merely suggestive) application of the scientific method for fairness, so justice.
The Liberty Shield approach towards bringing scientific constitutionalism to the forefront of public embrace focuses humanity on better defining actual harm, so actual health and actual liberty for better living for us all.
Law cannot wisely be the tool of popularly judging right and wrong, but the tool of preventing actual harm (e.g. not banning the mere holding of a certain plant in your American hand).
Do you want to celebrate the Great Hypocrisy on this “Independence” Day, or do you want to join me in celebrating the continuation of the revolutionary American spirit towards actual independence against pre-American conservatism for the sake of a healthy future for us all?
Feel free to think about that, while the fireworks explode outwards among the national jubilation.
I am an honest freak (or reasonably responsibly balanced "misfit", if you prefer) of an artist working and resting to best carefully contribute towards helping society. Too many people abuse reasoning (e.g. 'partial truth = whole truth' scam), while I exercise reason to explore and express whole truth without any conflict-of-interest -- all within a sometimes offbeat style of psychedelic artistry.
Spirit Wave Journal 
Leave a Reply