The Constitution and Declaration of Independence comprise the foundation upon which our nation is built.  It’s the law of the land and can be changed only by amendment (as it has twenty-seven times in our history, most recently in 1992).

The Constitution does not grant rights; rather it provides limits to government.  Our rights are assumed by the document to have been born with us.  It is the role of government to secure and protect our natural rights to life, liberty and property.  It is not the function of government to provide for our material needs and/or wishes.  Quite simply, it can’t and may not do both at the same time.

It is the work of the Supreme Court to clear up any constitutional misunderstanding (of which there should be few because the Founding Fathers made their intentions quite clear in the Federalist Papers and other documents of their time).  It is not its job to invent or read rights into the Constitution that are not there.  Doing so would be (IS) unethical.

There is nothing in the Constitution dealing with relationships.  The Constitution deals with individuals.  It does not define marriage, it protects it.  It does not define homosexuality or heterosexuality, it protects them.

The ‘progressive’ movement treats the Constitution as a ‘living document,’ which it is.  Of course it’s not dead—it remains our foundation.  It can be modified—the procedures for doing so are written into it.  But the progressive view is that it can be changed at the will of even a limited group of people.  This would be, and is, unethical.

Thinking people have been trying to make government ethical for at least 2500-years (see Socrates).  They knew and know (as do we all if we think about it) that power corrupts, and politics (more properly politicians) is all about power.  The founders knew this and limited the power of our government accorfingly.  That’s the reason that our nation has become the envy of all others–those limits still exist.  To violate them is unconstitutional and unethical.

ETHICS IS IMPORTANT.  And it is inviolate.  Redefining ethics to match so situation is impossible and unethical.  You can’t do it, I can’t do it, and government lx npt empowered to do it, no matter how many unethical people vote to do so.

Defend the Constitution.  It’s the best legal friend you have.  Be ethical, and demand the same from those for whom you vote.

Feel free to disagree, but be prepared to defend your position.

10 Responses to ETHICS and the CONSTITUTION

  • How is it Kelly Ann Conway and Donald Trump for that matter can endorse products through national television.
    “Buy Ivanka Trump’s Products” was highly offensive just as Trump’s endorsement of LL Bean on National TV after his election. Kelly Ann has more than once misspoken about facts and Trump’s idea of facts are also misleading. What can and will be done to reprimand these two?

  • They do so because the Republican Congress, and Chaffetz in particular, has failed to take action against them. This is the Federal Regulation regarding ethical behavior of those in office:

    § 2635.702 Use of public office for private gain.
    An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. The specific prohibitions set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section apply this general standard, but are not intended to be exclusive or to limit the application of this section.

    It is pretty clear the Republican Administration is in violation of this, but someone has to hold them accountable. The checks and balances of the three branch system does not seem to be working in this situation. Many have proposed that that is because of party affiliations that permeate those three branches. Our government officials and judges are putting party above the Constitution.

    • Tell that to the Clintons. Seriously, it goes without saying that using public office for private gain is unethical, and I don’t believe President Trump either needs or wants to plump his coffers with government largesse. He has plenty and needs less. But, back to the Clintons. And for that matter, Congress. Lotta work to be done there…

  • Aԝ, this was an extremеⅼy nice post. Taking the time
    and actual effⲟrt to produce a suрeгb
    article… butt what cann I say… I put things off a whole lot and don’t manage
    to get anything done.

    Have a look at my website … pocket knives europe

  • I appreciate your work, regards for all the great blog posts.

  • My brother recommended I might like this web site. He was totally right. This post actually made my day. You can not imagine simply how much time I had spent for this information! Thanks!

  • I simply had to say thanks yet again. I do not know the things I would have made to happen in the absence of those ways contributed by you relating to such a theme. It previously was a real terrifying circumstance in my circumstances, but noticing your specialized fashion you processed the issue forced me to jump with gladness. I’m happy for your information and then believe you comprehend what a powerful job that you’re getting into educating some other people through the use of a web site. I know that you have never come across any of us.

Leave a Reply