Major Party Disdain for the Constitution

In watching this year’s debates and commentary, I continue to find it intriguing that members of both political parties like to point to the Constitution as their touchstone, and are willing to take an oath to protect and defend it – but apparently only the parts they like.

While there are rare exceptions to each Amendment (yelling fire in a theater, possession of nuclear weapons, etc.), both major parties candidates seem quite comfortable finding ways to violate the Amendments that are intended to restrict them (the Government, not the people).

The Democrats love free speech - except by conservatives, or companies, or the Koch brothers, or the use of “words that hurt.” But free speech (contributions) by unions, or George Soros, or Michael Bloomberg are wonderful. The Republicans aren’t all that thrilled about freedom of expression either when it comes to protests and other forms of expression, and Donald Trump states that he wants to partially repeal the 1^st Amendment to open up libel laws and make it easy to sue news outlets that write things he disagrees with.

The Democrats aren’t very supportive of freedom of religion - unless you are non-Christian, then you're OK. Neither are Republicans – unless you’re Christian, then you’re OK. Other religions not so much.

This year, Donald Trump tells us that the government should monitor and track people based on their faith, and allow no Muslims into the country, which can only be done by requiring citizens to register their religious faith. While Christians have also committed terrorist acts, people seem oddly accepting of the idea so long as it’s just Muslims, assuming that the government wouldn’t use the database to track Christians at some point – and that everyone will be honest when reporting their faith to the government.

Meanwhile, Hillary tells us that Christians must change to provide abortion on demand, and that small, private business people of faith should be required to provide services in support of issues they find morally offensive. While many people find this acceptable, I wonder how they would feel if an African-American photographer were hired to photograph a KKK themed wedding – would it be acceptable for him to decline – or should he be forced to provide his services to the KKK? Laws must be applied equally, not just for those with whom you agree.

The Democrats loathe the Second Amendment, believing that the term “the people” in the Second Amendment somehow means “only the Government” - different from all of the other Amendments.

Neither party is very supportive of the Fourth Amendment in this era of no-knock warrants, civil forfeiture (taking assets when no crime is proven), the use of eminent domain to take property for private use by more well-connected citizens, NSA and police spying, and now forcing companies to allow government access to citizens personal cell phones (if you believe that this capability will only be used against terrorists, you’re foolish). The IRS, ATF, FBI, Dept. of Labor, and other government agencies have been/are being used against political enemies of whichever administration is in power - from Nixon to Obama.

The Tenth Amendment, which supposedly reserves powers not delegated to the government for the people or states, is circumvented by the Federal government taxing people, then blackmailing states for the return of that money unless they comply with the Federal government’s desires – for example in 1984, the Federal government began withholding highway funds unless states raised the minimum drinking age to 21.

The two parties seem to equally detest the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause. The Democrats love the national recognition of gay marriage (which Republicans hate, and was previously relegated to the states to define) - but just wait until a case comes before SCOTUS to provide equal protection of the Second Amendment and national reciprocity of concealed carry laws – then see how they scamper to defend the states against this horrible infringement of states’ rights!

The list goes on and on, but it would be nice to hear political parties and Presidential candidates discussing how they would return freedom to citizens rather than how they will take from one group and give to another, more favored, group in order to get their votes.