We should be respectful of those whom disagree. Disagreement is the fire in the forge of democracy. Our legislative process logical argument: it is a process of thesis, antithesis and resolution. Take the U.S. Senate for example. One hundred duly elected senators from fifty state representing the total spectrum of U.S. citizens with myriad of concerns, hopes and agendas coming together in logical, respectful debate to hammer out those laws which are best for our country. No, this author is not naïve enough to think that our 111th Congress has ever conducted itself in such a manner. Very possible no Congress has ever done so continually, but once in a while it has come close.

The U.S.A. is more than a country: it was and is a grand experiment in personal liberty, law and government. It is a dream of human rights we all must strive for each day.

The Constitution sets in place not only the machinery to run our government but the means to achieve the hopes our fore-fathers held for themselves, their descendants and the World.

The oil and grease that keep this great machine, this Republic, from grinding to a dead-stop and destroying itself, are an abiding tolerance and collective respect based on the belief that all citizens are equal and have the same rights.

“Every human being, of whatever origin, of what station, deserves respect. We must each respect others even as we respect ourselves.”

“Men are respectable only as they respect.”

“Civilization is a method of living, an attitude of equal respect for all men.

“Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be a spirit of tolerance in the entire population.

@Thomas A Salley
June 20, 2010
Used with the permission of Thomas Salley – guest author
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, Thomas A. Salley, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Albert Einstein, Amendments, Amendments to U. S. Constitution, Benjamin Franklin, Bill of Rights, Broadcast Media, commentaries, Consevative, constituents, Constitution, Democrat, every man able to read, Free Press, indepentent moderate, Jane Addams, Jefferson Davis, liberal, liberty and property, Marbury v. Madison, Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, Monticello, Monticello Home of Thomas Jefferson, Monticello.org, nation, news commentaries, News Papers, news story, political commentaries, Political Op Ed, Print Media, Radio News, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Republican, State Supreme Courts, Supreme Court, Tea Bag Party, Tea Party, Teas Baggers, Television News, Texas History Books, Texas school text books, Thomas A Salley, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Quotations, Thomas Payne, Thomas Salley, Thomas Salley Political writer, U. S. Constitution, U. S. Supreme Court, U. Thant, We the people, well-read citizen, Wikipedia

We should research. We should start with building a firm foundation of knowledge of the history, content and workings of our constitution. Before measuring what the press and politicians say against our understanding of the constitution, check their facts. It is not as difficult as it use to be: Bing, Google, Yahoo, Wikipedia and other internet resources require much less effort that the old card catalog in libraries before the computer age.

We should use our reason. Once we have constructed our individual standards for a Constitutional American Democratic-Republic (i.e. a government directed by the will of the people yet restrain by a set of laws applicable to all citizens equal), have read the news and what politicians and commentators said, have check their facts, then begins the real work. We have to think for ourselves. We most carefully consider all we have read and reason through things on our own. Blind acceptance of anyone opinions can lead to slavery of thought and free-will.

Beware of dogma. Webster’s New World Dictionary gives four definitions for dogma and three for dogmatic. The following is the author’s attempt to consolidate all seven in a single statement: Dogma is a doctrine, tenet, belief or a collective there of which is assumed to be unquestionable and may be the basis for a system of religious, political or philosophical belief. This is not to suggest it is not true but that all things should be respectfully questioned form time to time.

The Apostle Paul writes in II Timothy 1:7 :
“For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and a sound mind.”

Can any of us live in fear and be free? How can we overcome the fears that are ever-present in the world? Perhaps they can be overcome by all of us having a strong personal faith (regardless of our religion or lack there of), having charitable hearts to all especially if our politics disagree, and by using the mind with which we have been blessed.
To be continued

Dear readers,
Thank you for your time and attention. I hope this series does not convert you to my way of thinking but inspires you to think for yourselves and to engage in the 234 year old debate that is American politics. After our look a the constitution, some of our future discussions will include:

WHAT IS A FREE ECONOMY: in which we will discuss what a free economy should within the spirit of the constitution, is that what we have, and if not, what should we do about it.

HOW REPUBLICAN WAS THE GEORGE W. BUSH ADMINISTRATION: we will compare the last administration to the concepts of the Republican Party, past and present, and compare and contrast it with the administration of notable Republican Presidents such as Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and Hoover.

All suitable suggestions for future topics are graciously welcomed.

@Thomas A Salley
May 16, 2010
Used with the permission of Thomas Salley – guest writer
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, Thomas A. Salley, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Amendments, Amendments to U. S. Constitution, Benjamin Franklin, Bill of Rights, Broadcast Media, commentaries, Consevative, constituents, Constitution, Democrat, every man able to read, Free Press, indepentent moderate, Jefferson Davis, liberal, liberty and property, Marbury v. Madison, Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, Monticello, Monticello Home of Thomas Jefferson, Monticello.org, nation, news commentaries, News Papers, news story, political commentaries, Political Op Ed, Print Media, Radio News, Republican, State Supreme Courts, Supreme Court, Tea Bag Party, Tea Party, Teas Baggers, Television News, Texas History Books, Texas school text books, Thomas A Salley, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Quotations, Thomas Payne, Thomas Salley, Thomas Salley Political writer, U. S. Constitution, U. S. Supreme Court, We the people, well-read citizen, Wikipedia