'The Constitution and Freedom,' Part 1

[influenza99]

Loved the picture of Jesus in the clouds. LOL.

It is only because Jefferson was a deist / atheist that the constitution simply says "Nature's God" and NOT "baby Jesus" or the "god of Abraham".

I'm always shocked at how many "smart" people get this completely backwards.

[ThePenWolf]

@influenza99 A deist and an atheist are not the same thing. A deist may have different ideas of who and what God is, but that doesn't mean they don't believe in God.

[rockerstarblack]

They needed a DOCUMENT TO SAY THEY"RE FREE.

[rockerstarblack]

Fuck the Founding Fathers! They had their heads so far up their own asses. These idiots OWNED PEOPLE, Why believe in any thing they say?

[wannabestudd]

@rockerstarblack Your right in a sense they had slaves. However, politically is was not feasible back then. Iam not saying it was right because it was clearly wrong. But if you read into Thomas Jeffersons writings, he wrote about how Slavery is a monster that they have just put off. I know they were hypocrits but the Constitution definetly didnt allow slavery, they jsut didnt listen to it.

[rockerstarblack]

Where I come from not practicing what you preach makes you a Liar. Sure, he wrote some powerful pieces and arguments, but that doesn't mean anything if you're a liar. A beautiful lie at that.

[Aryaba]

Why is it that people who the most strongly voice their anti-slavery beliefs are the first to discard the Constitution?  Ignorance.

[rockerstarblack]

No not ingnorace, enlightenment. If my friend , who owned people, starting saying "everyman is Free" all the while owning people, I would laugh in his face. How can you declare your nation stands for freedom while denying it to your large population of slaves. Thats called hypocrisy.

[Aryaba]

My ignorance comment was aimed at your lack of understanding of the Constitution and your myopic understanding of the founding father's ownership of slavery. NOT your historically inaccurate view of their hypocrisy.

[rockerstarblack]

@Aryaba Can you blame me for a myopic point of view? Truly? But hypocrisy is hypocrisy. What they really intended was freedom for white males. These guys were genius, literally pulled the wool over our eyes. "It was all a dream" I cannot venerate people, who are clearly in the wrong.

[Aryaba]

@rockerstarblack Interesting. Obviously you aren't very familiar with the founding fathers at all. They realized that current society (that of the 1700s) had a great deal of improvements to go through and fully expected it to move in that direction. There were discussions of women voting, elimination of slavery, etc. It seems you think that none of these things were even considered. In fact, the founding fathers knew these things would change, hence no specific mention of sex or race.

[rockerstarblack]

@Aryaba No, I am very familiar. Thats why I raise my voice. Hypocrisy is Hypocrisy. At least the Romans were honest about it, but these new Americans hid behind beautiful words. Mind you, this is not an attack on the constitution, but on the writers themselves.

[Aryaba]

@rockerstarblack The C in Constitution should be capitalized. It is obvious you are only passingly familiar with the founding fathers.

[rockerstarblack]

@Aryaba Awesome. Thanks for improving my grammar. And side stepping my point. I am really interested in what you have to say.

[Aryaba]

@rockerstarblack Your point is born from misunderstanding and misinformation, so how is it even a point?

[rockerstarblack]

@Aryaba Please educate me! I really want to know. If this is too public a forum for us to discuss this, then send me a private message. But I am really curious. But my point ultimately is, How can preach freedom but deny it to WHOLE groups of peoples. I always thought this was an interesting talking point in American history.

[Aryaba]

@rockerstarblack If you are truly interested, read the Federalist Papers and the Annals of America (the volumes covering pre-revolutionary America). You will see that although some of the Founding Father's owned slaves, they were painfully aware of the hypocrisy. Instead of immediately outlawing slavery (and losing the southern states in the fight against England) they decided to let the issue lie and lie and deal with it in the future.

[Aryaba]

@rocketstarblack It was a case of immediate need overcoming idealism. History is filled with these examples. And although this is hypocritical on the surface, if you take the time to study their speeches and correspondence you will see it bothered them (obviously not all, but many of them). Hence why it was sometimes referred to as an "Imperfect Union" they knew slavery needed to be addressed along with Women's suffrage.

[TheBrotherMouzone]

EVERYONE SHOULD WATCH THIS!

[staffsgt7]

The 'Writs of Assistance' Act to allow British soldiers to just go inot a person's house reminds me of Obama allowing Interpol to do the same to us today. He gave them full immunity to do what they will to us and not have to justify their actions. And now with Obama willing to hand over control of the internet to foreign powers - we should not think we are so cozy. Who has the money and will to shut us up about Islam? ... Saudi creepy Arabia. Obama = muslim

[tomperanteau]

It's too late for this government. Our forefathers had the right idea, but we have become our own worst enemy.

[shouldlistentoronpau]

@tomperanteau

I agree, but I don't underestimate the power of Americans to rise when all is lost. If you look at the history of this great nation (or once great nation depending upon how you look at it) we come together and prevail only at times when all is utterly doomed. And all is just about utterly doomed.

Course I could be wrong.

[thomastholin]

***WAKE-UP***

Take a look at the US government organizations. DHS, FBI, CIA, FDA, USDA, ATF, EPA, USIA, IRS, INS, FTC, FCC, DOT, DEP, etc, etc.

"We The People" are in charge of these Federal organizations. And I'm getting pretty angry with the mis-appropriation of funds! i.e. HARD EARNED MONEY PAID TO THESE ARROGANT, FRAUDULENT & CORRUPT organizations USED TO TERRORIZE "WE THE PEOPLE"!!!!!!!!!

Paid for but not approved by "We The People"

End The Fed!!!

[MaxLibertas]

This is awesome. It should be required viewing in our schools. Do they even teach our children about our nation's founding principles anymore? Namely, individual liberty and limited government. No, our public education system is too busy teaching them about "global warming" and training them to be obedient little statists. Is it any wonder why we have an arrogant, corrupt, elitist political class that is totally out of control. The sheeple have gotten the government they deserve.

[Eikus89]

I do not believe that rights are given to us by god (since I do not believe in god). I believe that all people who wishes to live and prosper must accept and never act against the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I also believe that government should take away the rights of any person who does not respect these rights, since the abolishment of rights, implicitly or explicitly, is what such a person wants.

[joepeeler34]

i came here to post a comment on what I thought would be a contribution to an intelligent thread. But I notice that most of the last few posts are about mystics in the sky. Are some of you conservatives incapable of intellectual discussion devoid of your bizarre superstitions. Rights don't come from a god anymore than they come from the state. We have certain natural rights because we are individuals. These natural rights exist in a state of nature independent of government.

[ltomaino19]

to you mystics in the sky is what is known as freedom of speech...and yes what is being discussed has nothing to do with this amazing thread...things we have forgotten and why our forefathers fought for our freedom..we weren't - too much big government right now. rights should not be dictated as we should have learned from world history.

[agfigueroaa]

@joepeeler34 You need to check the state laws in the conception of the US.

You will probably grasp the degree of ur delusion.

[sunvoltage]

Scott Brown is a right-wing extremist pretending to appeal to the American middle-class. He is backed by Dick Armey and the Insurance industry to try to derail health care.

Scott Brown and the agenda he represents must die now!

[WMHJrDOL]

@sunvoltage 1. I disagree about the extremist suggestion, as I have heard he is a rino but I am concerned about replacing one set of garbage with fresh garbage. Though I lean conservative I am open to polite debate. Do you have go documentation about this man? I would love to contact you outside of this forum to provide an opinion for a newsletter. Let me know.

[sunvoltage]

Google ----The Wall Street front group FreedomWorks is mobilizing get out the vote efforts --- and see what you get. Dick Armey is the leader of FreedomWorks which is a lobby for the insurance industry.

[fortsmith1]

@sunvoltage You lose bitch. Scott won Hooray!!!

[InCharacter]

I'm am glad Fox has put this series on youtube, but I wish they would allow the user marceld to resume uploading current episodes of the Judge's online show Freedom Watch, to youtube. It's only viewable on their website now, and next to impossible to watch, the video is viewed faster than it loads, so every 7 seconds or so it cuts out as it attempts to load ahead. Plus it was much easier to comment on the show when it was on youtube. If you feel the same, please join me in asking Fox to do this.

[MillionthUsername]

To show that it doesn't "guarantee" squat:

1)Amendment process allowed INCOME TAX. There is NO LIMIT mentioned. They can tax you at 100% if they want. This nullifies property rights.

2) It allows the federal gov't to be the sole interpreter of its own power.

3) So-called "representatives" have immunity if they pass oppressive laws. "They shall not be questioned."

4) It contains NO PENALTY for VIOLATIONS of so-called rights in the "Bill of Rights".

Etc.

[kdavidmcd]

I don't think our forefathers tried their best to protect our freedom. People were more honest back then and didn't try to find loopholes in contracts. They probably turned over in their graves when the patriot act was signed. Thanks for the info:)

[MillionthUsername]

The "delegates" exceeded their authority. They were supposed to consider and recommend amendments to the Articles of Confederation - the previous supposed "law of the land".

It was another constitution and it was simply obliterated, ignored, and forgotten by this apparent coup. As I recall, it said "perpetual union" and such. All 13 states were required to amend it.

The convention met in secret and swore secrecy. Nice, huh? Then they bypassed the state legislatures using conventions.

[Azadie2]

COOL AID made in united States of america .... oops.... :)

your constitution was written based on the basic human rights. maybe you should study more. its ok to say I DONT know.. viva freedom

[MillionthUsername]

I like the Judge and what he's trying to do, but this constitution worship has to stop.

It doesn't "protect" me nor "guarantee" my rights. It's the very thing that justifies and enables the creation of a centralized rights-violating institution. It was rammed through by a group of power hungry politicians using the same kind of political trickery that everyone claims they despise.

"Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes..." REMOVED PROPERTY RIGHTS.

Stop the mythology.

[Azadie2]

dont get me wrong, The basic and the foundation of BILL OF RIGHTS and constitution was based on HUMAN's freedom.

FREEDOM of Speech , freedom of religion, freedom of a choice. so you cnat make that as a oppresive or anti democratic movemnets. THANK YOU

[juliaisafilmbuff123]

The US Constitution is actually a very oppressive and anti-democratic document that was written for the main purpose of protecting the private property and money of the wealthy from the poor.

Check out the video "America is not a democracy" if you want more info on this.

[ginny3245]

What kind of kool-aid are you drinking?

[Azadie2]

We the People

If the people of ERAN/IRAN would acept and undrstand the meaning of constitution and freedom, then we can do it too. STAND BY US. FREEDOM FOR ERAN/IRAN

[AhazAlford]

You know, historically speaking the British were actually pretty nice to the American colonists. Yeah, they taxed us. But British citizens elsewhere were being taxed much harder. If anything they were showing us favoritism. It wasnt until the Sons and Daughters of Liberty instigated a fight that the British came in with their Intolerable Acts.

[spanishaustralian]

just watched and thoroughly enjoyed. thanks judge.

[joerobertsoncom]

Great job Judge... More Judge Napolitano on FoxNews!

[Dewdman42]

you guys are missing the point entirely. A free country can only continue to exist as a free country if some power that is higher than any man or goverment agency garantees that right. Whether you believe in god or not, you must accept this principle of natural rights, otherwise eventually its only a matter of time before entirely stupid men try to take those rights back away from you.

[APZH09]

Napolitano and Ron Paul perfect team

[jv374]

keep the govn't off my back man!

[ErikNikolai]

At 5:52 he says that without the Bill of Rights, there would have been no Constitution.

Wasn't the Constitution created first, and the Bill of Rights later added as the first 10 amendments?

[jimt46]

@ErikNikolai

The Constitution would not have been ratified without the Bill of Rights. Too many states were insisting on it as a prerequisite for ratification.

[ErikNikolai]

Thanks.

[beingstill]

It was based upon the promise of an up-and-coming Bill of Rights that the Constitution was ratified. Although, I can see why some would find the timeline and this point somewhat confusing! Good point.

[gsrxx420xx]

i would love to see the judge a ron paul run a ticket in 2012....

[john2knj]

The Judge is a true patriot and friend of liberty! Judge Napolitano and Ron Paul, IMO, would make a great team for the 2012 presidential election.

[emeihongshen]

He is right when he said God is free, but then he said because of that, man is also free. Well, there is some truth here, but the most important point Judge missed is human's sin.

After Adam's fall, human are no longer free, we became slaves of Satan. Jefferson failed to understand this, so does Judge.

I hold this truth to be divine-inspired that all man are depraved equal, but we are endowed by our Savior some inalienable gifts, among these are faith, repentance, and pursuit of God's glory.

[okvideos5]

@emeihongshen what!!?? does this have to do with the constitution? Would you rather the Constitution to have said humans suck, they need a government to control them, the end? I am a slave to know one. Speak for yourself.

We are (being) made in the image of God. The devil only does what God allows and created him to do.

[emeihongshen]

After Adam's fall, man's will is bonded by Satan. Our will is no longer "free". If you like, you can read Martin Luther's "the bondage of will" or "Canons of Dort"

Don't get me wrong. Politically I'm a libertarian too. I don't want a big government to control us. I want limited government and support individual liberty. But theologically, I oppose libertarianism. Our freedom can't be built on free will, but on God's sovereignty and His Law.

[jaffijoe]

Mysticism has no bearing on reality. It is merely a concoction of human opinion and ideology. I respect your liberty to express your views, but I will never agree with them. Also, you seem to think that religion and classical liberalism are not compatible.  Ludwig von Mises exploded this idea in his book 'Human Action', the figurative "bible" of Austrian economics and classical liberalism (libertarianism). I recommend that you give it a read, it will correct your misinterpretation.

[emeihongshen]

So you think the doctrine of original sin is "mysticism"?

I respect Mises, and love Ron Paul a lot. But frankly, the libertarian movement will take us to nowhere. Because all men are sinners.

Only the truth can set us free, and that Truth is Jesus Christ.

[jaffijoe]

All men are sinners only according to your mystic doctrine. I hate to break it to you, but there are hundreds of active religions that all claim to be correct. To claim that only you and yours knows the answer to all that is is nothing more than fanaticism. The only questions that it answers is those that cannot be proved. The reasons for this is obvious.

[emeihongshen]

If you don't believe the doctrine of sin, if you believe human nature is good, then see if you can convert the majority American into Misesians.

Most people know printing money is bad, but every few support gold standard. Why? Because people are afraid they will lose their job and house if monetary policy is tight. People know what is good and evil, but they only choose evil. This is not about knowing something, it's because people has no power to do good. All are sinners. No other explanation.

[hubristime]

How dare you presume to know my soul. Get off your generalities, and get real. When you subcome to stereotypes you become part of the problem.

[emeihongshen]

I do know your soul, because you too, is child of Adam and Eve. We're made out of the same clay.

All men are sinners, fall short of God's glory.

This is how I know your soul.

[hubristime]

And this is how I know you are an idiot. A presumptious one at that.

[SonofPencilHead]

Not so; sin is wrongdoings as they relate to God. You ever lie? Cheat? Steal? Tailgate? Do things to harm yourself and/or others? Or anything else that you know you shouldn't do?

Then you have committed a sin. And I can guarantee that pretty much everybody has done the like. Ergo, all men are sinners.

[hubristime]

I KNOW the doctrine of original sin is a BULLSHIT story told to make you feel guilty and seek redemption through a system of control that siphons your spiritual energy to give it to another. You are a pawn. Don't pawn your wares here.

[emeihongshen]

I'm a firm Ron Paul supporter, of course I can post my opinion here.

Your rude attitude only justified the doctrine of original sin.

[Galicia1981]

If all men are sinners, so are the people that gave you your understanding of original sin.

And jesus was also a man, so also a sinner.

[emeihongshen]

Jesus was a man, but he is sinless. He is God, who chose to become a man. He is unique.

I know all men are sinners because the Holy Spirit worked in my heart and convinced me. My experience with myself and others also testified this truth.

The true freedom is only possible when peoples' hearts are changed. Libertarian ideas only function when self-government is strong enough to resist big nanny state. Strong self-government is possible when the bondage of sin is broken.

[Galicia1981]

It is impossible to be sinless according to faith bc as soon as you are made of flesh and blood you are a sinner.

Jesus never said he was god over everyone else. He said he was god, just like we all are.

Sin is a word made up by a corrupt institution to control the masses through fear. It is just as opresive to the spirit as a tyranical govt is to a free citizen.

[emeihongshen]

The doctrine of sin can make people feel guilty, but also give people confidence.

If one believe all men are sinners. First he will not oppress others, because he knows he is a sinner and he has no right to do that. Second he knows nobody else has the right to oppress him, not even government. Because all are sinners, including government.

When you view government as a institute of sinners, are you going to trust it ???

All men are depraved equal, so all men are equal.

[Galicia1981]

The conotation of Sin means that there is hell waiting for someone who does not follow certain rules.

The believe that you are somehow less than, stunts the spirtitual growth of man and in turn stunts the development of the human race.

All of mans greatest achievments have come from freedom. Freedom of thought, science, art, and most importanlty spirtuality.

WHen your sponsoring thought is one of sin, then you can never reach full potential bc you have put limits on your development

[emeihongshen]

the doctrine of sin means there is hell for EVERYONE. Including kings, presidents, governors, everyone. (Do you see the implication of individual liberty here?)

I agree with you our great achievements have come from freedom. I'm not against freedom, I'm all for freedom.

But freedom is not unlimited, unlimited-freedom is self-destruction. Freedom must be limited by justice and righteousness.

The doctrine of sin put a limit on our sinful desire, thus protect our freedom.

[Galicia1981]

unlimited freedom is not self destruction.

Its only self destruction when the consciosuness if you will, of the people is low.

Doctrine of sin did not put a limit on our sinful desire bc the world is still a very hateful place.

There is still much identification through race,color,nationality, and religion. This has put the world at a view point of seperation. Instead of unity.

When something is fear based it can never bring real peace to the soul or freedom.

[emeihongshen]

You are right. The doctrine of sin by itself can't contain our sinful desire. The purpose of this doctrine is to make people fear and be despair, only when this happens can the Gospel be spread.

All men are sinners. This is bad news, but it's reality.

In Christ sinners are redeemed. This is good news and bring peace.

Bad news first, good news next. This is Gospel.

Voters again and again send bad politicians to the office. Because voters are stupid, sinners.

[Galicia1981]

Dont look to christ for your answers, that is the easy way out.

The gospels are not even first hand accounts. They were edited by the most corrupt institution on earth.

God in the bible stories sounds more like an insecure dictator than a holy being.

God does more unholy things in the bible than man could ever dream of. God has done all the things he doesnt want us to do, but in a much more sinister fashion.

Unconditional love knows nothing of hell or punishment.

[africkinamerican]

@Galicia1981

What is your proof that the gospels are not first hand accounts and were edited by an institution? The gospels were freely circulated among the Christian assemblies during the first and second centuries, long before any institution arose capable of editing them. By that time, centuries later, they were too widely distributed and well entrenched in the Christian community for any institution to singlehandedly manipulate them.

[Galicia1981]

Through carbon testing we know they are not first hand accounts. And the gospels that were circulating around the 1st and 2nd were all different. Just like today the christian faith has over 10 different groups, so did they back then.

The bible was consolidated at the council of nicea from hundreds of different gospel;s down to 2.

And now we have the king james version, read up on king james and you will see why.

[okvideos5]

*no one (lol)

[rubanban5]

@anthony6661 have you read the constitution

[TheBeardOfPower]

For all men. Which is why the abolitionists believed slavery to be Unconstitutional and formed the Republican Party. In ten years they had Lincoln in office.

[TheBeardOfPower]

That's not entirely true. Adams advocated that we needed a governing body to enforce the law so we were not subject to simple mob rule. Let's look at how this works: AiG for example. Everybody got so ticked off at them due to government manufactured anger and media hype that they would have very well voted or decided to simply hang them all. That's why there needed to be a set system of law and not rule by the majority.

Never once did he argue that freedoms were not God-given, sir.

[d3vnull]

Why does do the likes of Hannity have a show and not Judge Nap?!? He's the BEST PERSON you have in your staff!

[tkubic46]

woot!

[Rangersarrow]

and for the atheist who dont believe in

god it means you don't have any rights!!

[795144]

you need to re-listen... to what is said.

[Rangersarrow]

yup the rich democrats slave owners

[CRAPCANNONS]

All the atheists are now knee-jerk anti-Constitutionalists, based simply on their allergic reaction to any notion of a 'creator'.

As an agnostic, I would still sooner choose rights granted to me by a creator than some corrupt careerist lawyer in DC.

Atheists are gleefully stepping into a trap.

[BiffMP5]

I'm anti-Constitution because Jefferson & co. correctly predicted that the government would pervert the document and continue grabbing more power. It took the 10th Amendment (which the Federalists/Constitutionalists railed against, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights) to explicitly restrict the three federal branches to their enumerated powers. Obviously, it didn't work.

Tom Woods and Doug Casey are right. Strict Constitutionalists are chasing a unicorn. The responsibilities (cont'd)

[BiffMP5]

(cont'd) of the federal government simply cannot be trusted to the busybodies and power-mongers who inevitably seek office. By the time citizens are mad enough to vote out the incompetents, millions are already dead.

And negative/natural rights exist without any notion of a creator, but I would also choose the creator over a bureaucrat. That's this atheist's opinion, anyway.

[xp19375]

Before the 17th amendment was ratified, senators were chosen by state legislatures. Since governments want power for themselves, many of the senators voted against federal power grabs. Now they are popularly elected, so this doesn't happen anymore. Watch part 5 of this series.

[BiffMP5]

Indeed, the 17th Amendment is one of the most destructive alterations that the Constitution has suffered. Even so, Jefferson, Jackson, Polk, Lincoln, McKinley, and many others committed their crimes long before its ratification.

Furthermore, Murray Rothbard deconstructed the nullification theory in his seminal essay, "Anatomy of the State." I highly recommend reading it.

Anarchy would be imperfect, but probably still the best feasible option.

[kmg501]

@CRAPCANNONS

I'm a non believer, don't presume to lump me into anti-constitution camp when nothing could be further from the truth. You need to reexamine your views. People are getting too hung up on the creator word. Nature created me. We are all free because it is a basic expectation of life itself. Even those poor people who live in North Korea. The difference however is that our ancestors fought for the right to exercise our freedom while the NK's haven't yet.

[CRAPCANNONS]

"People are getting too hung up on the creator word"

No im afraid not. I'm addressing a very clear legal issue of which you are perhaps unaware.

if you unseat the word creator and replace it with nature human law will then be under the jurisdiction of those representing nature; the UN, the Sierra Club, Cass Sunstein, etc.

It doesn't matter what YOU personally want for yourself. you will have legally forfeited sovereign authority over yourself, which you currently enjoy.

get to know the law

[TheLiberalssuckdick]

5 stars for Andrew Jackson and Napolitano.

[thane17]

The Judge is awesome!!! He nails it every time!

[Mauro1002]

thanks for the video