Subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts, and if you would like to support this effort and get the message out, please take a moment and give the podcast a 5-star review.
The Fight for Life in Tennessee
May 29, 2020
On Wed, May 27th, David had the opportunity to testify before the Tennessee House Public Health Subcommittee regarding two abortion bills in Tennessee, one being the Rule of Law Life Act. While both bills might have the goal of protecting the life of the unborn, we believe that only the Rule of Law Life Act makes a strong enough constitutional argument to the have the potential of overturning Roe v Wade in the Supreme Court. Why? Because we are arguing for the common law absolute right to life based on the 9th Amendment of the US Constitution, outside of the precedent of the 14th Amendment rulings of Roe v Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992).
Confusion in the Courts
May 22, 2020
We've said it before and we'll say it again. Words matter! And time and time again, we find court opinions wrought with confusion on how to apply the meaning of words in light of prior rulings and the Constitution, in many cases, words which are all together clear and unambiguous. It is bad enough that courts are confused on the meaning of words like life and liberty. But we find now that even words like man, woman, husband, mother and biological simply don't seem to ring true anymore in the court of law. When a judge feels he or she has the liberty reinterpret a statute simply be redefining a word, we have lost the ideas of separation of powers and federalism altogether.
Substantive Due Process and Its Error
May 15, 2020
The 5th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution grants the right of due process to every citizen. At one time in our history, we knew what words meant. But as those in power seek more power, we have learned to expand the meaning of words in order to expand authority. Substantive due process now exists because the word "process" has been expanded to include "rights." This idea gives courts the ability to now act as policy makers and a secondary legislative branch by using the 14th Amendment to expand rights it deems appropriate to all Americans. Substantive due process is the mechanism by which courts have made abortion, marriage and now education not state, but federal issues. It is inherently an expansion of government.
Executive Orders and Rogue Judges
May 8, 2020
One thing we are learning from the Coronavirus is that many leaders in government including those sitting on the bench do not understand the Constitution and the limitations of their power. One of the most glaring instances was the case in Dallas, Texas where a business owner was jailed for opening her salon. But more than that, the judge required an apology, an act of contrition, or forced speech. The ruling was so outrageous, that Texas' Governor, Lt. Governor and Attorney General all stepped in on behalf of the business owner. And the Texas Supreme Court ordered the woman to be freed from jail. The question is, how can we execute emergency powers without throwing liberty out the window?
Understanding Stare Decisis
May 1, 2020
Essentially, the Latin term "stare decisis" refers to precedent. Courts traditionally make rulings not only based on the written law, but also based on past rulings. The idea is to cause the court, in general, to be consistent and predictable in its rulings and exact justice evenly from person to person. The problem is when the court blindly uses precedent in spite of the law, reinterpreting or bending the law to fit its interpretation and thereby becoming a de facto legislative body. Frankly, we could use less precedent and more Constitution in our court proceedings today.
A Progressive Departure from the Foundation
Apr 24, 2020
There is no question that we have lost our way as a nation. We are a people deeply divided not only on major cultural issues, but even to the core of the meaning of the Constitution and how we interpret and apply law. In essence, we will either return to the principles of our founding, or we will take an "out with the old and in with the new" approach to our future. Our sincere hope is that we would return to a deeply held desire for liberty, and a strong adherence to the separation of powers so eloquently prescribed by our Constitution.
Morality and Good Government
Apr 17, 2020
Can our republican form of government exist outside of a good and moral people? Our founding fathers didn't think so. In fact, John Adams had this to say, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." The Constitution is not some sort of magical document. Its function is primarily to both promote a government by the consent of the governed and provide for a separation of powers within the government itself. As Adams saw it, an immoral people can consent to bad government. The Federalist Papers (1787-1788) echo this sentiment. We must return to the ideals of our founding. We must return to God.
A Deeper Look into the 9th Amendment (with Adam MacLeod)
Apr 10, 2020
The 9th Amendment says, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." What are the "other rights"? Our Founders' understanding of government and law at the time of the nation's founding was deeply rooted in common law and the idea that our rights are pre-governmental. And, the government's role is to secure those rights. Professor Adam MacLeod of Faulkner University discusses the common law and its role in our government and lives even today.
When Civil Government Collides with God's Word
Apr 3, 2020
During this time of crisis and quarantine, our liberties are being tested and boundaries being pushed by civil government. And this has been alarming for churches as worshippers are being asked, and in some cases mandated not to meet for worship. But is this truly a religious liberty issue? Is civil disobedience called for in response? We will discuss some of the history behind our first amendment and how Christians should view their relationship with civil authority.
At War With Our Words
Mar 27, 2020
The words that we use have meaning. In fact, we can know much about a person by the words they use. And especially in the case of courts and legislatures, the words we use define the worldview by which we operate under the law. So, words matter. But what if words lose their meaning, or perhaps some choose to haphazardly and unilaterally redefine them? How does that impact how we understand and interpret our laws? And what of the idea of civility? Do I have to use "your" definition, or re-definition of a word in order to be considered civil, or tolerant?