SoccerfreakAB2 said: The people are not repsonsible and cannot make decisions regarding the constitutionality of the acts and laws of congress. That is the job of our judges and elected officials. I say:
I have to point out, you are not only wrong, but it is specified exactly.
What do you suppose is the reason for having a "DEMAND for Redress of Grievance"?
This is when representatives act outside accordance to the will of the citizens. This is the last step, before LEGAL, constitutional revolution. This is a Constitutional process, and is directly addressed.
Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and
to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
(clip from:
http://www.givemeliberty.org/Freedom...hulzSpeech.htm)
The founding fathers, in an act of the Continental Congress in 1774, said, "If money is wanted by Rulers who have in any manner oppressed the People, [the People] may retain [their money] until their grievances are redressed, and thus peaceably procure relief, without trusting to despised petitions or disturbing the public tranquility."
This very American Right of Redress of Grievances Before Taxes is deeply embedded in our law.
The founding fathers could hardly have used words more clear when they declared, "the people … may retain [their money] until their grievances are [remedied]."
By these words, the founding fathers fully recognized and clearly stated: that the Right of Redress of Grievances includes the right of Redress Before payment of Taxes, that this Right of Redress Before Taxes lies in the hands of the People, that this Right is the People’s non-violent, peaceful means to procuring a remedy to their grievances without having depend on – or place their trust in -- the government’s willingness to respond to the People’s petitions and without having to resort to violence.
Before going further, I’d like to clarify two points: first, the question we are dealing with here is not whether the government has the power to tax, but whether the government is abusing its constitutionally limited power to tax; and second, there is the question of whether the government is using the tax revenue to effect other abuses of its authority.
The founding fathers were well acquainted with the fact that government is the enemy of Freedom, that those wielding governmental power despise petitions from the People; the representatives of the People, in a popular assembly, seem sometimes to fancy that they are the People themselves and exhibit strong symptoms of impatience and disgust at the least sign of opposition from any quarter.
The founding fathers knew that it was possible for the institutions of the Congress, the Executive and the Courts to someday begin to fail in their duty to protect the people from tyranny. They knew that unless the People had the right to withhold their money from the government their grievances might fall on deaf ears and Liberty would give way to tyranny, despotism and involuntary servitude.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states clearly and unambiguously, "Congress shall make NO law …abridging …the right of the people … to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
While some Rights are reserved with qualifications in the Bill of Rights, there are none whatsoever pertaining to the Right of Redress. There are no limits on the Right of Redress. Any constitutional offense is legitimately petitionable. SoccerfreakAB2 said: The New Deal has no relevance to the government of today. I say:
The New Deal has much relevance to the government of today.
(isn't it rude when people don't elaborate. hint hint.)
SoccerfreakAB2 said: What parts of the government have been changed to go against the constitution? And make sure they are legitimate and not changes that are interpreted by our judges. I say:
Excuse me? Why would it make a shred of difference if or if not interpreted by a judge?
SoccerfreakAB2 said: Tell me exactly HOW the people derived their own power and not the delegates who debated and finally created the constitution. I say:
OK.
It is called the Preamble, and it frames the purpose and power wielders in the Constitution.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The only thing that can remove it, is what created it, we the people.
SoccerfreakAB2 said: "They [representatives we vote in] have failed on numerous occasions with no threat of accountability due to violations occuring over such an expanse of time, that the people couldn't effectively raise argument to the problems while those that changed the laws were in office."
The representatives fail us, not the government system. I say:
What I am saying, and I don't think you understand, is that if a representative fails, he is to be held responsible. If many fail, and pass laws that violate THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, this is provable movement toward despotism.
(clippet from:
http://www.givemeliberty.org/Freedom...hulzSpeech.htm )
We have established that the Founding Fathers clearly declared that the Right of Redress of Grievances includes the Right to withhold payment of taxes while the grievance remains. By the 1st Amendment, the founding fathers secured for posterity the Right of Redress of Grievances Before payment of Taxes and they made the Right of Redress Before Taxes operate against "the government," that is, against all branches of "the government," -- the legislative, the executive and the judicial branches. Redress reaches all.
Notice that the founding fathers, sitting as the Continental Congress in 1774, held that this Right of Redress Before Taxes was the means by which "the public tranquility" was to be maintained. Then, sitting as the Constitutional Convention, the founding fathers declared that one of the major purposes of the (federal) government was to "insure domestic tranquility." Therefore, whenever this Right of Redress is violated, the People have a double grievance: a denial of justice by the government and, an incitement by the government to general unrest.
Today, our concern is the grievance that falls under the heading of a design to subvert the Constitution and laws of the country by those wielding governmental power.