In fact, there is a desire among many wingnuts
to hold a new Constitutional Convention to craft a new document that
adheres strictly to their warped vision…
Devotion is an overwhelming feeling of strong love, or loyalty, to a
cause or person that is not unlike religious fervor. If one listens to repugicans, teabaggers, the religio-wingnuts, and wingnuts in
general, their devotion to the U.S. Constitution is second only to their
devotion to their religion they conflate with the nation’s founding
document and law of the land. However, their so-called devotion is not
to the Constitution either in principle or its current form, but to a
minority of its parts based on their beliefs and policies that are
decidedly contrary to most of the document they claim sole ownership of.
Many wingnuts are adamantly opposed to most of
the Constitution’s amendments, and even those they hold near and dear to
their hearts depend on their distorted interpretation including those
in the Bill of Rights they would amend tomorrow if they were able. In
fact, there is a desire among many wingnuts to hold a new
Constitutional Convention to craft a new document that adheres strictly
to their vision of a nation the Founding Fathers never intended. Even if
they are not advocating a new Constitution, they demand the nation
return to the original intent of the Constitution’s framers and therein
lies their opposition to most of the Constitution’s Amendments.
There was never a better example of conservative’s
demand to return to 1787, and the original intent in the Constitution,
than Rick Santorum parroting a yearning many repugicans espouse. On
C-SPAN last Sunday, Santorum said that the Founding Fathers were right
when they limited voting rights during the creation of the United States
for the sake of continuity. “You could say that’s horrible, that’s
terrible. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t. But it was consistent with the
values the government was founded upon.” It is also the desire of many
conservatives today to return to 1787 when voting was limited to only
adult white men with property with the 21st Century proviso that
property-holding white men adhere to the christian religion.
There are many repugicans today that
regret
women, people of color, and young adults (over 18) were granted equal
rights and the ability to vote. Several Southern states enacted voter
suppression laws specifically targeting young adults, people of color,
and women. Subsequently, the Constitutional Amendments giving women,
African Americans, and young people voting rights (Fifteenth,
Nineteenth, Twenty-fourth, and Twenty-sixth) would be eliminated if wingnuts had their way primarily because they do not support repugicans.
Wingnuts also oppose Constitutional amendments
besides those dealing with voting rights such as the 17th that allowed
the people to directly elect Senate representatives, and the 16th giving
the federal government authority to levy income taxes to operate the
government.
Most of the wingnut opposition to
constitutional amendments are those enacted after the Civil War, and
there are still racists in America who regret the 13th Amendment freeing
the slaves was ratified and became the law of the land. It is
unbelievable, but there is a reason one hears various evangelicals and wingnuts state openly that African slaves were happier and lived a
quality life as indentured servants, and it is likely they would abolish
the 13th amendment today if they were allowed to give African Americans
“a happy existence.”
Of all the Amendments enacted after the Civil War,
it is the 14th Amendment conservatives hate above all others because it
provided citizenship to persons born in America, due process rights to
all citizens, and equal protection under the law fulfilling the
Declaration of Independence’s assertion that “all (men) are created
equal.” According to the preponderance of 21st Century wingnuts and
religio-wingnut’s beliefs, all Americans do not deserve equal
protection under the law or the right to due process protections. While
conservatives are at it, they would eliminate the 9th Amendment because
the Framers understood their were other rights not specifically
enumerated in the original Document that would have to be addressed that
led to subsequent amendments to ensure all Americans enjoyed equal
rights.
As the nation observed over the past four years, wingnuts seek to deny women equal protection and due process rights
to decide their own reproductive health, prevent gays from marrying the
person they love, and eliminate Americans’ equal protection from
predatory religious imposition. In fact, it is the 14th Amendment’s
provision(s) that racists, xenophobes, homophobes, and especially
evangelical christians appeal to the courts for authority to violate the
rights of Americans unwilling to conform to the religio-wingnut and wingnut vision of America.
The Bill of Rights’ Amendments would not be spared wingnut’s axe in the vision of “their” America, particularly the
1st Amendment. Freedom of speech was
attacked
by repugican Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal who sued an organization
for exercising free speech and it was frankly surprising a court found
that Jindal’s lawsuit was an attempt to restrict free speech. The wingnut Supreme Court distorted the freedom of speech clause by
granting free speech rights to corporations to buy elections, and
anti-choice protestors to interfere with women seeking medical care. Of
course, it has just been three days since Americans witnessed the High
Court strike down half the populations’ freedom from establishment of
religion in its Hobby Lobby ruling. The religio-wingnuts have sought to
use the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause to impose religion on the
population for thirty years and the High Court gave them the assist they
needed to achieve their goal.
The Amendment’s are not the only parts of the Constitution wingnuts despise; they would eliminate
Article VI, paragraph 3
and impose a religious test all candidates would have to pass in order
to hold public office. There are at least seven states that
prohibit American
citizens from holding public office if they deny the existence of god,
and religio-wingnut agitators support the theocratic notion that
only christians are worthy of holding public office. State’s rights advocates would certainly abolish the
Supremacy Clause
that establishes that the federal constitution, and federal laws, take
precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions.
The list of Constitutional amendments and articles repugicans and their wingnut cohort oppose, and would abolish by
legislative fiat or outright eliminate in devising a new Constitution,
belies their so-called adoration and devotion to the document; whether
it is the original version ratified in 1789 or the current amended
Constitution. It is safe to say that a new wingnut Constitution
would include an establishment of religion, guns everywhere, and state’s
supremacy over the federal government and little, if anything, else.
The repugicans and their assorted allies claim they
love the Constitution and demand a return to its original intent, but
their assertion belies every policy, stated agenda, and phony devotion
they claim to a document they hate as much as this nation’s waning
democracy. If they had the authority, wingnuts would shred and then
burn the Constitution with extreme prejudice and rewrite it with input
and express consent of corporations and the religio-wingnuts (the wingnut Supreme Court).
