 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most of us have heard the phrase by now. It echoes about society like a slogan deliberately sown through the media. Reminiscent of "for the children," "national security," or "public health," the short sentence containing this grouping of words sounds reasonable on the surface. Given that most people rarely delve beyond the superficial, the phrase succeeds in its goal of short-circuiting disagreement. There is, however, real danger in letting the implicit message conveyed by this sentence go unchallenged.
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact."
A suicide pact... Who could possibly endorse an agreement designed to encourage and result in voluntary and mutual death?
The politicians, commentators, and writers who utter this simple sentence grimly imply a warning that the Founding Fathers did not intend the Constitution to prevent our self-defense. When our nation is attacked by enemies, they suggest, we must be able to fight back and repel those who would obliterate us. Our country must not be left helpless to counter those who oppose us in this unstable world.
On one hand, of course, I agree completely with these ideas. I see what the rebels had to endure during their struggles against King George. I understand all they risked, the hardships they faced, the doubts and uncertainties -- both personal and political -- they wrestled with on the road to freedom. I deeply appreciate the efforts men such as Jefferson and Madison and Washington expended to create a new nation that would last beyond their lifetimes. The contentious debates that led to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights -- despite the flaws of those documents -- represent a richness of intellect, integrity, and independence that dwarves what laughingly passes for "public discourse" in today's impoverished world.
Given the cost these men and their fellow citizens paid to win their dearest goal, I hardly think it credible that they intended to tie the hands of either themselves or their descendants when it came to securing that liberty they had precariously won on the battlefields of America and in the courts of Europe. The fact that the first battle of the War for Independence flared to brilliant light over gun control would have burned brightly in their thoughts.
No. These gentlemen were no simple-minded and unsophisticated peasants too ignorant to safeguard their own self-interests. They were not fools.
Apparently, though, the proponents of the catch-phrase, "The Constitution is not a suicide pact," think we are fools.
Time will tell if their smug judgment of their State-educated citizens will prove to be true or false.
The "leaders" who utter this condensed ball of tripe usually do so in response to anyone who dares question the received wisdom regarding recent governmental responses to the World Trade Center attacks. How dare civil libertarians challenge the measures already implemented or hesitate in accepting those proposed for the future! Reluctance to swallow whole each and every law, regulation, and prohibition is tantamount to confessing one's lack of patriotism.
To advocate the idea that "The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is for these politicians to assert their right for carte blanche authority to decide how "we" will deal with the problem of "terrorists." It is to demand the power to force us to do whatever a small cadre of men and women determine will "protect" us from our foes. It is to tell us that these "superior" souls must solidify their position of control if we are to obtain even an uneasy safety during this never-ending "war" they have brought down upon our heads.
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" crowd views the supreme law of this land not as a rare triumph to be cherished, a bold achievement to be celebrated and jealously guarded from the dark slime and creeping vermin who would defile its purity. No. To these ignorant or devious or evil people, the Constitution is merely an impediment to their explicit or implicit plans for transforming our world into their warped image of what constitutes a decent society.
Dissent to the de facto nationalization of our airports?
Disapprove of the federalization of law enforcement?
Protest the gutting of habeas corpus and the establishment of military tribunals for American citizens?
Object to national identification cards?
Demur to random searches, metal detectors, or arbitrary detainment?
Dispute the right of the State to disarm you?
Suspect the motives of those who seek to censor speech, create omnipresent surveillance, and tap your phones and computers?
Mistrust those who declare endless "terrorist alerts" while they quest for ever-expanding domination?
Unwilling to surrender your mind, your heart, your body to the mindless calls for conformity, acquiescence, and submission?
Then you, my friend, are an obstacle for these "civic-minded" stalwarts to crush and remove.
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" folks contend that:
If you exercise your right to read or write whatever you damned well please or to protest the insanity of what the government is doing...
....as guaranteed by the Constitution...
...then the terrorists will overwhelm us.
If you attempt to carry your weapons -- guns, knives, nail clippers, or whatever -- in order to defend yourself, your family and friends, and your community...
....as guaranteed by the Constitution...
...then you are a public menace encouraging terrorism.
If you try to protect your money, your papers, your home, your body from unwarranted and causeless scrutiny and seizure...
....as guaranteed by the Constitution...
...then you are a terrorist sympathizer.
If you support the right of everyone -- citizen or not -- to a trial by jury, legal representation, and due process against an omnipotent state...
....as guaranteed by the Constitution...
...then you should be classified as an enemy combatant.
If you assert your right to be left alone and to do whatever peaceful activity you want without the permission or intrusion of the State into your affairs...
....as guaranteed by the Constitution...
...then you are a loathsome traitor deserving of whatever nastiness befalls you.
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" champions erroneously tell us that there must be "tradeoffs" between our liberty and our safety. They assure us we should abandon some of our freedom for greater security. They contend that honoring and adhering to the Constitution will lead to dire consequences we dare not contemplate. Obeying the Constitution, they say condescendingly, and being protected from the terrorist threat are mutual exclusive -- indeed, antagonistic -- conditions.
Yet the exact opposite, of course, is true. Only scrupulously safeguarding the rights -- the freedom -- recognized and guaranteed by the Constitution will shield us from our enemies...whether those be foreign or domestic....
We do not have to grant the collectivists their erroneous premise. We do not have to fear the illogic of an involuntary "suicide" if we reject the burgeoning police state slowly and greedily engulfing us.
No. Given current efforts to negate and nullify the document created to prevent the destruction of our lives and liberties, what we really need to oppose today is the murder of the Constitution.
