Most of us are aware of the much referenced “Wall of Separation” alluded to by those who wish to obfuscate its origin to be within the Constitution and additionally to be a humanist commandment from that document that, like Caesar to Moses striking the name Moses from every obelisk and building, strikes the very mention or reference to God from every public place.

How many of We The People have sought out the actual source of the fist allusion to a “Wall of Separation” between church and state?

That source or origin would be President Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists from January 1, 1802. The paragraph, as sent and received by the Danbury Baptists, which gave birth to the “Wall of Separation” reads as follows:

http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”

Note that he does not separate the most applicable complementary clauses from the First Amendment. Those clauses placed restrictions on the legislators that they shall “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

Note that in full context Jefferson envisioned such “building a wall of separation between Church and State,” such that it “restores to man all his natural rights,” and that he was convinced that none of these “natural rights” were in opposition to his “social duties.”

One must therefore conclude that this “Wall,” protecting religion from the whims of government, nevertheless had a door through which those of any faith or no faith may freely pass to conduct their social duties such as the business of governing.

Those of faith need not abandon their belief at the door, thus denying that faith, for they are yet endowed with the unalienable right to freely exercise that faith, even as they govern, for the complementary proscription to Congress, that they shall make no law “respecting the establishment of religion,” cannot be abridged merely by “the free exercise thereof.”

Note that President Jefferson demonstrated this very fact with the closing paragraph of this very letter to the Danbury Baptists as he offered this prayer:

“I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.”

And so President Thomas Jefferson immediately set an example and prayed from the very wall he envisioned.

Which Presidential candidate will best serve the Constitution?

The Watchman

The Constitution firstly enumerates in Article II, respecting actual duties of the “executive Power,” that the President is the Commander in Chief. Therefore his or her primary concern is to “provide for the common defense” as proclaimed in the Constitution’s Preamble.

The Preamble declared that “We The People” formed this Union with the goals of seeking perfection, Justice, Domestic Tranquility and that while the government so conceived must actually provide for the common defense it must merely “promote the general Welfare” and yet it must “secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

Mitt Romney embodies the mission for which the Founders tasked this nation’s government for he obviously does not fear, because of the pressures of political correctness, to identify our enemies as he states his primary concern will be the national defense.

Romney has always been like most Americans, who are personally pro-life, and yet he, like many Americans, lost sight of the founding notion that we must secure the Blessing of Liberty to our posterity. While pondering the issue of cloning Romney rediscovered that it is a founding principle that “We The People” must secure, as Martin Luther King might note, the promissory note of Liberty not only to “ourselves” but also to our future generations, the Posterity so noted in the Constitution.

How can "We The People" claim to secure said Liberty if we allow, and affirm by acceptance, the summary execution of one third of this nation’s innocent and defenseless developing sons and daughters for the offense of existing as unwelcome inconveniences?

Each American should look at each and every candidate and imagine him or her as the Commander in Chief during this era of soaring technology that has created the possibilities for a few to cause here-to-fore unimaginable destruction and death. We know that such is not a groundless fear for indeed it has already been manifested not so long ago.

Mitt Romney has demonstrated that he knows who our enemies are and he has not lost his cool or become tearfully self-absorbed with sentimentalities over being the object of shameful false arguments, such as ad hominem attacks, or revelations that he was behind in a poll, or that he lost a minor primary election.

Of all the Presidential candidates, Democrat or Republican, Mitt Romney may very well be the best to fulfill the Presidential mold that our founders established.

My mind is still open and I am always on watch.

The Watchman