New Frontier Compact, by X. Liberal

There was a reason the founders specifically separated the church and state. They fled the church of England for the freedoms of the frontier when the church was the oppressor. There is too much power given to the church in your outline. Being free is just that, free, free from the constraints of another person’s will. Being that religious or not. You failed to provide checks and balances to prevent abuse of power by the church. Remember the god you worship is a different god then some other Christian may worship, it’s up to the individual to interpret the word. I understand why you thought to draw this up in the manner it is written but it would be corrupted much quicker then the original Constitution of the US

I agree with your assessment but for a different reason.

God does not force himself on us, for the most part. Therefore, we must not force God on others.

That being said, for all those who profess to follow Christ, the Ten Commandments are essential. For those who do not, 5-10 form an outstanding base for a “compact”.

You have used the word ” Congress ” a number of times, if this for a fictional land, I ask why ?, there are other terms to use, why not express them so ?.

You might want to try reading your bible, Article 3 is a good laugh if you do. If you read your bible there are quite a few woman employed outside the home. And the metric system, really?

Yes, please read your bible. What about Ruth (book of Ruth), Deborah (Judges 4), Lydia (Acts 16). God did not make the women to be like a dog under a mans feet, He made her a helper to her husband (Genesis 2:20. And, if married,so she is; a very good helper.

I see some very good things in this. I also see where their could be a “GREAT deal of abuse”by Pastors and husbands. There is always someone wanting to control others.
I wish you well.

Lots of good thoughts there…

Some good thoughts and polices here, but as always, where more than one person abides, so does a difference of opinion. You mentioned a prison, but who pays for it, and what are the other processes? Perhaps addressed later? I thought Pastors were head of the local Church,not Government. Even our Founders didn’t do this, and what if more than one Church? What about freedom to not Worship or attend Church? Last thought….rioting, arson, and murder are not chargeable under redress of a grievance? Only capital cases are during a time of Service? Again, some good thoughts, but also conflicts. Keep up the good work.

I cannot agree to this. Very disturbing to me.

Progeny not prodigy (in the Preamble)

All due respect sir, but you’ve created a theocracy here. It is one thing to base values and culture on Judeo Christian principles, it is quite another to create a ruling class of virtually unaccountable Clergy who hold all power in a judiciary. Priests, pastors, and Clergy are humans, just like everyone else, and subject to the same attacks by Satan as all men. History is littered with abusive priests. No, I feel the judiciary should be far more independent.

Additionally sir, you’ve placed limits on free speech to include swearing. Again, all due respect, but swearing is and should be protected free speech. You’ve a slippery slope here, as government can define what swearing is. Eliminating language in the effort to destroy vocabulary is very Orwellian. Additionally, failure to extend full protection to Females under the law creates an environment ripe for Sharia style abuse of 50% of the population. If everyone were wonderful people, sure widows and abused women would all be taken care of. But, as Madison put it, “If men were angels, nongovernment would be necessary”

[content removed]…But it has problems in it I can drive a tank through. I have just as much trouble with living under a Christian Theocracy as I would a Islamic Caliphate. I mean seriously, did Article 3 Section 2 just say that my wife & daughter can’t have a job outside of the home?

This is some lunatic fringe stuff, here. The author looks to not be very knowledgeable about the world.

As an example, “There’s no paid law enforcement or Sherriff, but the Chief Law Enforcement officer is the town’s Pastor.” Oh, you mean like the Taliban?

Also, “At no time shall a female call herself equal to a man or vice versa, as God created them male and female, which means different—not equal.” This is to say that females are less than men. Again, kinda like the Taliban?

There is a difference between being civilized and a savage. A lot in this post blurs that line.

Id prefer the US Government stay somewhere East rather than contaminate Montana.

This is way to much like Europe an the way the Catholic Church ruled by force for 100’s of years are u going to burn non believers at the stake?? Cause you could easily be there in 100 years after creating a constitution worded like this what about the freedom to vices like pot liquor and hookers I mean maybe your putting that in that free will clause but if not let’s look at proabition an the drug war an how women have been taking money for sex since before Jesus hung on the cross maybe have a vice tax but no more then 1% of the price of the good or service your paying for just the thoughts of a libertarian coal miner in the mountains of Kentucky I know first hand how religion takes away freedom a wet dry vote is the only time you will see bootleg’ers an preachers holding hands I was raised Pentecostal an went to a Methodist church so iv seen the far sides of it both would take freedoms away in the name of God an safety

I could not, in good conscience, ratify this. I think, in the heavily weighted religious language and precepts, a dangerous leaning towards a theocracy. Very much Sharia-like to my mind. However, some of the articles are valid and have merit. It needs an edit by a Constitutional Committee. But we all know about things designed by committee, right?

Although well written and thought out, this only shows the wisdom of Jefferson. IMHO, we just need to go back to the roots of our original constitution. Jefferson did not establish a state religion because he knew that, at the time, following Gods law was just understood and accepted. There was no need to state the obvious.

Honestly, this is extreamly sexist as well as promoting a theocracy. As a libertarian, I have tons of issues with this and would have nothing to do with it, or your “New Frontier”. I am sorry but I still think there is justification for seperation of church and state, and women, while certainly different, ARE created equal to men.

It is an interesting exercise, hopefully it stays that way.

Was it your intention to set up a theocracy? Because this definitely fits the bill. I am a Christian, and take my faith extremely seriously. However, because I believe the teachings of scripture, which mandate that each person is drawn by the Holy Spirit into fellowship with the Father, through the redeeming work of the Son, I do not believe it is the place of any government to mandate that people be Christians. I think that is wrong. I do, however, agree, as did the founders of the US, that without the self government (Holy Spirit) in the hearts of the people, there is no freedom, for people will be a danger to the rest of the populous. I think the roll of government is to protect those freedoms, but create a safe place for the church to evangelize people to Christ, and allow the Holy Spirit to transform their sinful nature.

Rose,
Beautifully put!

Many good points here that I believe would get us back on track, but many more are overly subjective. I see so much potential for abuse and misuse in this, but perhaps I am jaded by our current system of abuse and misuse. The points about media/journalism are far too subjective and left to the will of those who have power. The points about equality are also highly subjective. Pastors who have been called by God have been given a spiritual gift of teaching. That same pastor may not have a gift of governance or judgement in non-spiritual matters.

First, I would like to say that I do believe the constitution/bill of rights/all added amendments…etc. is far from perfect. I would like to add some comments from a “30K foot view” perspective about the constitution. I think, the framers were clear about the need to not form a state religion. The judiciary is a self inflicted wound created by the american voters on themselves. Freedom of speech is a slippery slope “approach with extreme caution!!!”. I believe that you cannot legislate morality with pen and paper. I wish I could remember who said that all law is mans pathetic attempt to enforce the ten commandments. I do appreciate many of the thoughts above and would like to add that this only highlights “in my opinion” the need for a serious examination of existing documents. I also appreciate X-liberal for bringing up this subject and the obvious considerable thought he/she has put into the subject. Well in any case my last thought.
The constitution can be amended “I see no reason to re–invent the wheel”.
I would like to thank everyone on this blog for the years of informative/enlightening information and occasional smiles.

HH

I see a great many specific current frustrations addressed and woven into the existing fabric of our Constitution by this manifesto. However, this society will easily and quickly degenerate into a theocracy or ecclesiocracy, human nature being what it is…

Perhaps elements of it could work at the family, extended family or tribal level, as the ancient Israelites, Celts or American Indians lived. In an amalgam of individuals larger than that, we are for the most part now too sophisticated and educated to submit to any kind of cleric’s or imam’s arbitrary interpretation of how we should live or what is best for us. A centralized control, be it called communism, socialism, statism or the clergy never, NEVER works with human beings. And human nature NEVER changes.
Best of luck.

The Christian mindset is the flower of self governance. Freedom is the goal. I believe that a few well reasoned amendments/amplifications to the Constitution would be a good start. I reckon most believers would resist vigorously what you are proposing, as there would be great potential for another yoke of oppression couched in religious text.

With respect to the writer, everything here has already been addressed in the Convention, Federalist Papers, Anti-federalist papers and the debates on ratification at the State level.
Nothing wrong with the Constitution, the abuse of power by all levels of so called government is the problem.

[[Nothing wrong with the Constitution, the abuse of power by all levels of so called government is the problem.]]
And government does not exist without humans. Therefore it is the human that is the root of abuse. The religious right tell us every day what they wish and desire.

George Will wrote an article in Newsweek many years ago entitled “Where do we draw the Line” in reference to freedom of speech, religion and societal vs individual beliefs and morals. The Simpsons cartoon also posed the question in an episode where cartoon violence was considered evil and banned from television but the nudity depicted in the statue of David was considered art. Half the community disagreed that nudity was art, hence the problem of who gets to say where line is drawn. After reading this carefully constructed and thought out treatise, I have concluded that I personally don’t want the writer of this article anywhere near the decision making process of where the line should be drawn for the society in which I live.

First, it is commendable to take the effort to consider what might be an improvement upon the what the U.S. has today that has not gone well. However, I believe that most of what has not gone well is because it has been ignored or added to so much that the foundation has been lost. If Bible-believing people lived what is in the Bible, lived in community together, and returned to what the nation’s forefathers wrote, we would not require a new Compact such as this.
Commenting on this Compact, however, as a Christian woman in a Biblical marriage, I am writing after speaking with my husband that the general tone of this compact diminishes God’s greatest creation– man and woman. It reduces both to animals with animal behavior, which I hope X Liberator does not intend to do. In your section on Women and Marriage, the language there implies that men will rape if they are not married and that women who suffer sexual abuse are to blame because they have denied men the marriage bed. X Liberator is denying that man has self-control to follow God’s law in terms of purity in his sexual urges and will instead rape to satisfy his “need” if a woman does not surrender herself. That is false! I have two unmarried sons in their twenties who are virgins, waiting for the right woman, sir! They are strong, healthy men who have self control and have plenty of young women available but have chosen to follow God’s ways of living. On the other hand, there are men who in a marriage or other relationship who are harsh and disrespectful with a woman, and it is not the woman’s fault. You simplify matters far too much.
I admit that marriage and family is not held to the sanctity that it should be in our culture, and I like the idea of a family vote, within a God-centered culture. However, I believe that there must be an underlying respect for the women within this culture, which I do not see included in what you wrote. You, sir, seem to look at women as similar to a prized cattle to be bred, and it is not Biblical. In the Bible, the husbands did represent the family in negotiations and anywhere there might be conflict. However, women did go into the marketplace and conduct business, even selling wares. Your reference to Genesis 2 as a basis for women not working outside the home is to a time before Eve was even created by God, so of course she could not work the garden. She has not even yet been made to be Adam’s helpmate. The Hebrew word really means help opposite. It doesn’t remove the “help” but adds opposite, as she provides an opposite viewpoint, a complementary one. Yet, God said that Adam needed one.

Well put Anon. My thoughts agree with you on this.

And before investing so much centralized power in pastors and churches remember each one of us is with sin and subject to corruption.

Women and men have different functions, yes. God has specific roles for men and specific roles for women. However, unmarried women, such as the daughters of Zelophahad are viewed as equal with men by God, who is ‘no respecter of persons.’ I see LOTS of specifics on how women are to be circumscribed within your rules, but no mention of how men are to be dealt with who won’t love their wives as themselves, like Christ loves the Church, men who commit adultery, and other sexual sins and men who refuse to financially support daughters, sisters, etc.

Anonymous, KB, and Dare Tuitt,

I appreciate your input on this aspect of women that is proposed in this new constitution, especially that of Anonymous (with whom I can certainly identify, for I, too, am in a Biblical marriage). I don’t wish to say much about the Theocracy without checks and balances, except to say our present constititution is quite adequate for our needs, but it was not framed for a non Christian people in mind, in fact won’t work for such.

But what really got under my skin was the writer’s naive (male dominant, superior) perspective on women’s role. He’d make a good Muslim for all that he cares for women. I for one, will not become a slave under his new regime. I will fight to the death, and do so with righteous indignation!

While it has some good ideas, I believe it would lead to woman being marginalized and pastors having to much power.

Guys your con. will not last one day without more fighting than you can imagine. After all some people are sure they are more equal than other people.

No such thing as Judeo-Christian principles. This country was founded on Christian principles. Judeo-Christian was invented in the early 20th century to dilute the reality that this nation was founded by white, Protestant, Christian men. Vox Day speaks to this extensively on his blog and provides a good beginning point for the rejection of this false notion.

X. Liberal,
Please take my tone as one of light humor not cruel sarcasm.

I read this and then slept on it asking myself, “How can I put this with a tone of grace?” I don’t want to discourage you but parts of your preamble present a frightening scenario. What happens to the women who do not comply? Are they flogged, stoned, or just made to sit and peel potatoes all day?

Some of the most egregious and evil acts have been perpetrated under the guise of a righteous moral standard interpreted by men. The crowds yelled “Crucify Him” Matthew 27:22.

I’ve met a lot of lousy pastors. In fact, I’ve met some that I doubt are followers of Jesus. My nightmare scenario, under this law, would be serving a KJO Pastor. Would The Message, NIV, ESV, etc. be burned in a public ceremony? Would these unapproved bibles be contraband? What about “Pilgrim’s Progress?” What about “Beowulf?”

Very well put The Recovering Feminist.
I don’t see men who are irresponsible and selfish addressed in this at all. The kind who “accidentally” break bones then blame you for being too small. Men who are totally financially illiterate but have really big hearts. Men and women may see things differently. This sounds like Sharia law ( Not biblical law) and has absolutely no place in a constitutional Republic. I do feel family values are under attack but you can’t legislate morality.
The issuing of currency is glossed over but not addressed which will be the down fall of our current system. We were warned to never ever allow a central bank that controlled our economy through inflation and deflation. It is more dangerous to liberty than standing armies. Just what is said currency valued against since metals are secondary? Good Will? No paper currencies ? That is what makes things go around and true ‘free market” Most people could not pay cash to establish a homestead for their families to live in, even in the mid 1800’s farmers had to get their seed with debt and paid once their crops came in. Banks existed before The Fed. How do the all powerful clergy get paid? Are we forced to tithe? What is we think our 10% is better served going directly to someone in need rather than making multimillionaires out of men of God called to serve Christ supposedly. Corrupt churches are mentioned throughout the entire bible. I do take issue with these men and women who live lavish lifestyles, while members of their congregations are barely scraping by or can’t even afford their meds. I knew several little old ladies that did this because not tithing was a sin. I assured them it was okay to buy their medications instead of funding the ministers new huge SUV. It has driven people from the church in droves. There are so many holes in this. Financial illiteracy will play a big role in the downfall of our country. . How is “good will” valued? Metals are secondary but have a value attached to them. How? No offense to X Liberal but this system is what our founders wrote the constitution to protect us from. One of the biggest acts of treason perpetuated on the American public as The Federal Reserve Act. Per our current constitution only Congress has the right to issue our currency. If our money said US Treasury Note vs Federal Reserve note, we’d have debt free money. This doesn’t seem to be understood here. It isn’t paper money and credit that are the problem it is who issued it and what it is valued against.

Things would totally fall apart and we would be complete serfs with how this is worded. If it is “financially” feasible men can own tanks. Okay we’d be starting from scratch just how would there already be an elite ruling class? This has some good points but our monetary system would be critical to our survival. Just what would we do to defend its without any debt? Oh the militia so would all of our metals be confiscated to pay for all this if we were attacked and even then who decides? I guarantee we would be so people who’ve hoarded guns rule? Just because the have them or have even served in the military doesn’t mean they know how to lead. Prisons Military schools all need to be funded so with this system the rich overlords with all the military equipment rules? How did their “good will” pay for all of this to begin with in a system started from scratch and “good will” being the primary form of payment? Our constitution was very well thought out and it was the greatest place man has ever conceived . I like some of this but a lot of it sounds like exactly what our founders tried to avoid once again you simply can’t legislate morality. We all try to live our lives for Christ but what happens to a Deist in our New Frontier? Thomas Jefferson was a said Deist and IMHO one of the most brilliant founders.
What if your married to someone already who is financially illiterate, who doesn’t follow Christ like you do? The woman is just at the mercy of her husband when she is the one gifted with the negotiating skills? Is she to be seen but not heard? Woman have been teachers, nurses and other occupations that require nurturing and compassion for hundreds if not thousands of years. It has gone way to far in the name of “equality” so the global ruling class have more worker bees and have changed the idea of what a family unit is. Their ultimate goal is selective parenting and we as a society are living on borrowed time right now.

The difference between Americans and the rest of the world is we’d rather die on our feet instead of live on our knees. George Washington.

That system sounds like we’d be forced to our knees in more ways than one, especially the women.

Greetings Newbie,
“…this system is what our founders wrote the constitution to protect us from.” Amen!

I would rather follow an honest pagan than a double-minded pastor with ill motives.

This post had me reading Isaiah 40 today for comfort:

“Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket, And are regarded as a speck of dust on the scales; Behold, He lifts up the islands like fine dust. Even Lebanon is not enough to burn, Nor its beasts enough for a burnt offering. All the nations are as nothing before Him, They are regarded by Him as less than nothing and meaningless” (Isaiah, 40:15-17, NASB).

I too found this disturbing. Our constitution would work if it were followed. It simply isn’t. We would need a few clarifications already mentioned by other readers with the exception of one. Congress may pass no laws or systems that they themselves don’t participate in. He did address term limits. I took a few online college courses to see what is being taught today, in forms of government a Constitutional Republic is left out. We are not a Democracy! I’m working on an article about teaching your children some of this because whether it is a homeschool curriculum or public school this is left out. Civics was taken out of schools in 1970. I didn’t know until I studied it for myself. Globalism is being taught and I’ve been told the idea of America will just fade away. We simply can’t allow that. We will be the economic North America Union soon enough. Too many people have their heads in the sand. Bankrupt is bankrupt. If people knew what I knew they’d be praising God that Trump was elected vs Clinton or even a conservative Globalist. They believe in corporate installed Oligarchies over nation-states. If Trump doesn’t pull us out of the Paris agreement step up preparations and get to the Redoubt as fast as you can. ^[1]

I feel men have gotten the raw end of the deal in todays society. Especially white Western men which is nonsensical. Yeah the rest of the world is in poverty because of white American/ European men especially the white ones a whole whopping 4% of the global population. The same families who have run things for 86 generations run things today. If men loved their wives as Christ loved the church and vice versa we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. Our views tend to be shaped by experience. The bible is helpful but it is an entire book not one to pick and choose scripture to suit your arguments especially when writing a constitution! We could likely sit and debate all night using scripture to back up our points. My feeling is this is a younger man who has been deeply hurt and educated in the past 15-20 years authored this.

Sorry for the redundancy and the typos. The way this is formatted makes it hard to see what I’ve written and make the appropriate edits.

Newbie,
Thank you for your response. Appreciate the video as well.

What a great endeavor you are taking on to write an “article about teaching your children some of this…” I look forward to reading it if you will be submitting here.

“The bible is helpful but it is an entire book not one to pick and choose scripture to suit your arguments especially when writing a constitution! We could likely sit and debate all night using scripture to back up our points.” Excellent point!

I disagree, and quite vehemently so, with the “weapons of mass destruction” comment under the Bill of Rights critique. How is a “weapon of mass destruction” defined? A machine gun, rocket launcher, fighter bomber, or artillery piece (which is correctly recommended for private ownership in the statement just above) could all be “weapons of mass destruction” as they are all capable of killing large numbers of people very quickly. I submit that a law abiding citizen has the right to own ANY and ALL weapons that exist, provided that, of course, they can afford them from their own resources without stealing from others (either overtly or by taxation). And yes, in principle that even includes nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. Local jurisdictions may decide how those are to be employed and controlled depending on local circumstances and mutual agreements, but the individual right remains.

This post was also very disturbing to me. Have you forgotten the Pharisees and how many laws they burdened the people with. I am reminded of the scripture In Acts (15:24-29), “…For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay no greater burden on you than these necessary things: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality, from which if you keep yourselves, it will be well with you. Farewell,” (Acts 15:28-29, WEB. I also believe that God’s original intent would be that He would be our King (ruler).

I find this a problematic lacuna for libertarians that they try to create new codes of rules instead of trying to use the old ones that work (if adhered to).

First, there is no judaeo-Christian. Either we are still condemned under the law, and need to be circumcized INSTEAD OF baptized, or we are new creatures in Christ, Jesus. As St. Paul said, the law was our schoolmaster, but have we graduated or not? Feel free to wear a dunce cap.

Second, far smarter and informed minds under prayer during months in a convention hammered out a set of rules. For one man to do so is almost to assert yourself as a prophet not unlike the LDS founder Smith (note I really, really respect Mormons because they understand better than almost anyone else that you must KEEP HIS (Jesus) COMMANDMENTS).

While I appreciate your efforts, I see this as youthful zeal, not mature wisdom. I do not condemn, and see you are on the path of wisdom, but are still closer to the nadir rather than the peak of the mountain.

Finally, to emphasize my point, and to echo Adams, if men were angels, no government would be necessary. And Action, Power corrupts. I know of no manner to construct any set of rules, simple or complex, that will not be first subverted, loopholes – ambiguities and contraditions (see Godel’s theorem) exploited, or simply ignored when enforcement is difficult or creates far more grave evils. We are fallen. The best of us realize how corrupt we are. The greatest saints describe themselves as such because the blinders have been removed.

I have both hope and fear that we can recover the USA. But I also see that the Redoubt, and the greater area will likely secede and be the core – not just the Redoubt.

Worse, I see the divider – diabolos – using words. Aren’t traditional families sexist? (don’t ask the mommy bloggers here who seem to be wildly happy). Race is a bigger problem since there is a correlation – while I won’t guess how much is luck and how much is causal, things like a proscription on not having children out of wedlock has been described as racist. Christendom arose from white Europeans, just as Jesus arose from Judah. You can accept it and adopt it, or say Non Serviam! Content of character has been abandoned for a color of skin pass.

I wish it wasn’t so, but the devil will try to neutralize sin by calling condemnation out as not being politically correct. (mostly secular) Jews who disobey use this to push porn, fiat currency, or usury. Or as I said, if you KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS – not the disputed trivia, but the clear clarion bell flashing neon sign commandments, I will welcome you as a neighbor. By their fruits you shall know them, not their appearance.

“There’s no paid law enforcement or Sherriff, but the Chief Law Enforcement officer is the town’s Pastor. All matters of charging a citizen is through the Pastoral decision based on criminal activity and/or an unrepentant heart for non-felonies. The Pastor also has the right to deputize any male member of the community in the interest of justice.”

And what law enforcement officer is going to arrest the pastor for having sex with his secretary?

And what law enforcement officer is going to arrest the priest for having sex with 10 year old boys?

SECTION 2

At no time will a female employ herself outside of God’s law according to Genesis 2:15 in that she holds a man’s wage earning job outside of her home, and

And what happens if I do not want a husband…

A widow shall be taken care of by community love, until she finds or is blessed by another husband to provide for her household in its entirety, and

Love does not provide food and clothing…
[content removed]

Creepy and scary. Especially the subjugation of women. This would establish a theocracy that is little different from the Taliban and ISIS. In fact the only difference I see, is they are Muslim and this writer pretends to be a Christian. Keep your “paradise” well away from me.

Perhaps we ought to spend a lot less time telling others how to live.

Dear Friend,
You diminish the roll of women. You diminish the rights of women. My wife is my helpmate, my equal in every way. I want her on my side in a firefight. The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental human right. Every man, woman, and responsible child has the right to bear arms in defense of life liberty and property.

You place too much emphasis on the roll of the church and the pastor. My relationship to God is between me and my God, as is your own. I worship as I choose as long as my worship does not infringe on the rights of others to worship as they choose. That is the failure of Islam as it is being practiced today. The right to worship or not worship as you please is a fundamental human right.

If you had studied the Constitution of These united States, you would understand that many of the caveats that you have placed are not necessary and would only lead to more tyranny than we already have (Who decides, who interprets?). Better to have a specific amendment or clause limiting interpretation to the words actually written with the definitions and meanings to be applied at the time of writing. In other words, no changing of intent by changing the meanings of words (what we have today).

Freedom of the press is an individual right, not a corporate right. It comes with the right of ownership of the product of my mind. I have the right to publish as I would. I do not have the right to force others to publish what I write. I do not have the right to force others to read or agree with what I write.

Sir, there is too much room for tyranny in your compact. Tyranny of the State over the individual, tyranny of male authority over women, and the tyranny of the Church over man and his personal relationship with God. If man’s relationship with God is not personal and individual, there is no relationship at all.

It’s a good place to start for you fictional land of New Frontier, however you really need to work on it some.

Go back to the Constitution, read the Federalist Papers, read the writings of the Anti-Federalists, read Madison and Jefferson and their Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of c.1798. Then you can get a better handle on what a constitution should encompass.

There was a tv show where a fictional pundit used the term “American Taliban” to describe a group of people, I cant recall who at the moment as it has been a while since I’ve seen that show, however that term would be extremely applicable to the fictional characters that would condone/create a government like what you described. There was also a Kevin Bacon film that came out in the mid-eighties that came to mind when I saw the part about the pastor as a LEO….. Lol no dancing in New Frontier I suppose.

In all seriousness though for your novel this would make a great antagonist as it is entirely anti-American and anti-liberty. So pretty much anybody could get behind protagonists that fight and eventually topple the terrorist regime.

Best of luck in your novel writing endeavors.

This is basically just something called “Anarcho-Capitalism.” You may have heard of it.

interesting, years ago i rewrote the bill of rights
here cruzan.info/other/page2.html like wise any feedback is welcome…

wally

Nah, I’m a Libertarian, this won’t work for me. As a matter of fact, your people would probably be our enemies unfortunately.
I still love the web site though and will continue to read.

Should be called “Compact for the New Fantasy World”.

You my friend are truly an idiot of the highest degree. Maybe you can call the leader of your new country “Jester” or “Idiot”.

Spanish Inquisition, Roman Inquisition, the Netherlands Inquisition. Throw in non-national inquisitions, and you have nearly 600 years of a select few determining righteousness from heresy. A clean hire vs simony.

This read, to me, like a ISIS or Taliban manifesto, but from a Dominican Catholic view point.

I’d take the mess we have now over what this proposes.

I guess it begs the question for me: If the pastor is elevated from mere preacher to supreme power, why have all those articles, amendments, and such? Why not just 1 or 2 sentences, like, “Whatever Pastor Bob thinks is best”?

I, too, have many issues with the presented compact, especially its tone towards women. While I firmly believe that God created men and women to fulfill different roles in the family and society, they are to be loved and respected in equal amounts. Both sexes are loved children of God, saved by the death and resurrection of Christ.

Particularly alarming was the passage concerning sexual harrassment and rape of single women. Section 3.2.2 completely ignores the verses surrounding 1 Corinthians 7:4 and the entire context in which the apostle Paul writes. In fact, in the second half of the very verse referenced, Paul gives biblical authority to the woman over the body of her husband (which doesn’t appear to fit very well with the patriarchical government in the compact). In the remainder of the chapter, Paul praises those to whom God has given the gift of being single, chaste lives devoted to God. ““To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭7:8 ESV
Paul does not command celibacy, but here gives celibate, single living high praise. It is not a sin to marry, nor is it a sin to remain single. Sexual temptation assaults both the married and single person, but it is up to them whether to act upon it. Rape can never be justified by any reason, whatsoever. Period. Rape is a real phenomenon that destroys the lives of those it affects, both male and female (for both can be raped). X. Liberal’s blatant disregard for the sanctity of sexuality by assigning all of the blame involved in rape to the non-aggressor shows that he needs to re-read his Bible. God instituted marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Sexual desire is to be fulfilled within the context of that bond and nowhere else. This makes rape, consensual sex outside of marriage, pornography, affairs, etc all sins.

I strongly advise X. Liberal and his readers to reconsider 1 Corinthians 7 and it’s implications on the married and single life. I could never support a compact such as this and would gladly die to defend womanhood against such a shameless attack by the forces of evil.

“I will also not have time to reply to feedback but will gather all into account.”

Well, my friend, you expatiated your point of view, requested feedback and clearly got an earful!

Though you peremptorily state you won’t have time to be getting back to the responders, we hope that with all the time you found to work your ideas out you’ll snatch a moment for at least a quick reaction on the general tone of our feedback.

Have you been influenced to reexamine any of your thoughts or propositions?

While I am reluctant to speak in absolutes, this compact would fail and likely in less time than it took to write.
Two faults are self-evident with only the briefest of skims over the text.
#1, The document is too complex. Complexity, with all it’s best of intentions, leaves open the possibility of interpretation, which in turn leads us back to where we are now.
#2, No government may be successful that relies upon ANY religion. All men and women have a relationship with god in their own way, and no other man or woman, or especially government, may rightfully impose any more than opinion upon that relationship.

I am a conservative Christian but this sounds like a Self-Defined Christian version of Muslim Sharia Law. Would never vote for this.

As far as a Woman working in any capacity in or outside the home, I would encourage the writer to read Proverbs 31:10-31.

God makes it wonderfully clear what the expectations are of a Godly Wife. Section 3 is most exclusive of any scripture that does not conform to misogynistic biblical exegesis.

I find it interesting some folks still try to put women in their “place”. If you follow the history this goes all the way back to Eve and the forbidden fruit.

If Adam had “manned up” and followed God’s commandment would he have been sent out of the Garden? What would have happened if he had continued to follow God’s commandment concerning that fruit.

I find most of the trouble in the world to be caused by males who simply won’t “man up” and live the the final part of Joshua 24:15 ” as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” It’s REEEEEL convenient for such to blame the women folk for the problems ain’t it?

im curious as to how Genesis 2:15 precludes women working outside the home

15 And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

Thanks for all your feedback. I was hoping this would be like an MBA program where your peers correct and make it work. If it is all junk, then I expected a new rewrite. Anyways, I have spoken to a few of my attorney friends and one Constitutional Attorney in which to obtain proper feedback. “Disturbing?” What is disturbing is the next wave of “resistance” forming in a city near you! Hope we can all do something, even if it’s in the wrong direction at first, because God can never steer a parked car. God Bless!

Well my wife wanted me to clarify some artifacts about this post. First of all, I do not “take it personally” about any comment and all is appreciated. Thank you! To set the table, I was coming at this Compact from a Liberal (ex-liberal) standpoint. Two main points from your feedback is I have overlooked such items as the Separation of Church from State and abuse of powers.

I have a better understanding of the conservative angle from your feedback in which some backdoors were left wide open in this writing. My goal was to primarily angle around the use of Liberalism to bend or even distort the US Constitution. Some of those angles were from the standpoint of:

1) Utilizing the Separation of Church from State clause to sue Judge Roy Moores Ten Commandments from his courtroom lawn in Alabama, halting NFL players from placing “John 3:16” inside their sun glare makeup, expelling our youth from entering public schools for carrying a Bible. Liberals shouldn’t be allowed to sue God from the planet He created. Also, in my humble opinion atheism is a religion and should also be separated from state [school districts].
2) My generation is probably the last in world history, which Moms were in the home as Homemakers. It was a comforting feeling to walk home from school and understanding that every home in the neighborhood was dotted with a Mom. My angle was, and statistics prove, that when this country held about a 10% divorce rate, that the women working outside the home rate were about 10%. Today those numbers are 62% divorce (with first and second marriages) and 70% of women working outside the home. Coincidence? It seems that for thousands of years men held the wage earning jobs and women were the cornerstones of the nuclear family and it worked best for society. Today, it also seems that women (working outside the home) are having a difficult time holding both careers and families together at the same time (yes that could be because the man isn’t pulling his slack in the home taking over the role of Mom). In addition, statistics also demonstrate that women (working outside the home) by and large, do not support a stay at home spouse with children with her equality of income to a man (that could be why a man can’t be the Mom in the home and needs to work). However, men support, to this day, children and spouses in the home, as I also do too with one income. Which gives rise to the fact, that if there are so many divorces (broken families), a man’s job taken by a woman leaving the home, and no equality of responsibility with that woman’s equal income, where is human society going?
3) The points about sexual harassment, it was not to point towards the biblical stance that men must control themselves and live proper with their wives and other women in the communities. We all understand that should be a given! No this was also from a liberal angle. The rape culture was created by Liberals first by passing out condoms, usually in school colours, to your children, then sexually activating them as teens, then in college teaching Women’s Studies courses that we live in a rape culture instigated by males, then promote the marriage of men later and later in life by females. It is happening folks and grab a woman’s study book from your local university and understand that Liberal society is to liberate women from the role of wife and marriage (even the marriage bed). I didn’t say liberate women from the role of Mom, because those textbooks are laced with a single mom-hood approach to society (again breaking up the family) and even teachings on how to sue the Patriarch in a divorce court of law for his “things” (home, stock portfolio, jet ski, and yes his children)—something that never happened in human society prior to enacting Liberal Feminism or women leaving the home to go to work in a “man’s world”. It works much better as women as the Homemaker and men as the provider of the nuclear family (heck, how many men have been fired out there because you don’t “fit the team of women” in corporate circles? I have and my male peers all have been. In my father’s generation, we had stable neighborhoods, stable school districts, stable Church bodies, a more stable country as those men were allowed to work at the same Corporation for 30 + years and never terminated for reasons we are today. And our mothers and grandmothers received their retirement until they passed on. It worked better that way).
4) The “Equality” item in this Compact was also from a Liberal standpoint. A woman suing the US Military for not being allowed in combat in demanding to hold her own against men, then suing the US Military for rape relating to those same men. Also the NFL, NBA, NHL do not have women on their frontlines because of the “inequalities” so why the frontlines of our battlefields? I agree that we are equal in Christ’s redemption plan and that is the Christian perspective we all understand. Thank you for pointing that out. But, my goal is to debunk the myth that Liberals are inserting into human society (inserting chaos to the tune of male firings and over $1-trillion in lawsuits) that women are equal in everyway, shape, and form to a man. That couldn’t be further from the truth!
5) Regarding the second amendment, I had some positive feedback on this and outside this website. It was a build off of a defensive plan of a populous with no standing military. In the era of our Founding Fathers they held the same military instruments of war as the government in charge (muskets, gun powder, naval ships, cannons, bayonets, tactics, communication, espionage, uniforms, command, etc.) and they explicitly outlined that their armament was to defend one populous against tyranny from a government action. The previous century alone held numbers to liking of 171,000,000 people murdered—primarily in the name of governmental programs (primarily atheist) of their day.
6) One of the main points I’ve received from your feedback is in Mathew 18:5-17; to bring a grievance to the Pastor first, then two or three leaders in the church, then to the congregation, then to outside courts if needed. Thank you for highlighting that oversight!
7) Paper money has been around a lot less time in human history (about 15 minutes as compared to other means of remuneration) and the metric system seems to be a better way in conversion calculations and is used in all engineering programs due to its accuracy and ease of use.
8) I also wanted to angle around this “redress a governmental grievance” written in our First Amendment. It shouldn’t mean to implement themes to riot, burn, destroy public property, and even murder to bring your grievance before the government. Those are crimes. There were no comments on this so I believe we are all in agreement.
9) Okay swearing words should be protected under “Free Speech Clause!” But my wife and I are tired of going to a public restaurant and overhearing the use of the “F” word and other swearing phrases from a group of teens sitting next to us or even in corporate America to convey a strong point. But you’ve made some good points in that you can’t legislate moral behavior. When I grew up the neighbors’ parents would come outside and discipline us children when our parents were not around. I like that much better and demonstrates love with the society wanting you to become better.
10) No I abhor ISIS, like many of you, and believe Sharia Law is pathetic. I was not going in that direction. I was stressing points that liberating women at the expense of the human family and undermining the Patriarch, through feminism, is also pathetic and abhorrent.

Again, I wanted to thank you all for your feedback, and I understand there are two different angles we’re coming at—me in placing Liberalism into checkmate, and yours demonstrating the lack of checks and balances and even in some cases abuse of power by the Church. Your feedback, though some harsh, has given me insight into backdoors that need to be closed—something I didn’t readily think of (I’m just one person with a few hours into this, whereas our Founder’s had many years and revisions from many men’s thinking to devise our God given Framing). I also know there were no comments on most of the line items in this Compact, so I will consider those lines good to go. Thank you! One thing we’re agreeing on is that when the populous veers away from God’s word, we are in a much worse position in human society than if we abide in His word and that we are all obligated to check our moral compass periodically to align with His word.

Thanks all for your excellent feedback, and this was an exercise in which to get us all talking. I was thinking like this would be more like Market Street in Philadelphia in which we all are wearing wigs and ascots with nickers and receiving educated feedback to a constructive project.
Blessings,
X. Liberal

If you would like to keep this dialog going outside of this site, I will allow the Editor’s permission to circulate my email. We hope to hear from you! God Bless.

It always seems that tyranny follows a failed state. As Spooner said, either the Constitution failed us or we failed it. Regardless, I suggest a libertarian replacement, rather than a statist one.

THE SUPREME LAW OF THIS COMMUNITY/NATION IS
THE NON AGGRESSION PRINCIPLE
“No one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate “physical” aggression against another, nor to delegate or authorize its use.”

In accordance:
Each person has the individual right to self defense and the defense of their property.

Each individual person owns their own body and no other.

Private property represents our investment.

No one has more “rights” than any other.

(You don’t have to agree with them, just don’t violate them. You have been warned!)

If you insist on a State or a King, I suggest reading, 1st Samuel, 8.

Peace, Love & Brotherhood,
Through Equal Rights, Equal Firepower and Civility.
Tahn

Well keep us in mind if human rights, that you don’t have, overrun your doorstep.

My wife and I believe that human rights are doled out equally to all humans by their Creator in Heaven. Just as the Bible illustrates and oddly enough the US Constitution.

No one has women human rights, or black human rights, or gay human rights. That’s what we are hedging against in this Compact.

That’s all,
God Bless!

No, what you wrote is that women don’t have human rights.

Your utopia may never come to fruition (and I hope it doesn’t), but there is something you can do right now to make your stand. You can refuse to use any technology that was developed, in any way, by women working outside the home. You don’t want to be a hypocrite, right? Here is a list, off the top of my head. It is by no means an exhaustive list of technology shaped by women.

We can start with Radioactivity, because of Marie Curie. The unit of measure for radioactivity is the Curie. So stop using any Curies, or any fraction thereof. This means no tritium gun sights or watches. You won’t use nuclear medicine, no matter how sick you get. There are many more industrial uses of radioactivity, so research them and boycott modern society.

Next, Computers. Because of Ada Lovelace, Grace Hopper, and the women of ENIAC (Adele Goldstine, Jean Jennings, Marlyn Wescoff, Ruth Lichterman, Betty Snyder, Frances Bilas, and Kay McNulty). So give up your computer and internet. And avoid using any products or services that use computers, in any way.

Kevlar. Invented by Stephanie Kwolek. So no body armor.

Spread Spectrum technology. Invented by Hedy Lamarr. She wasn’t just an actress. So make sure any communication devices you use don’t rely on this technology.

Speaking of actresses, you better not watch any movies with women in them. Because those actresses are working outside the home. How would the motion picture industry operate in your world? I guess female parts could be played by male actors, dressed as women and pretending to be women. That has been done in the past. But wait, that sounds like . . . Drag Queens! And you hate them too.

By the way, if you were born with arms and legs, and are of a certain generation, you should be thankful to a woman who worked outside the home: Frances Oldham Kelsey, who kept Thalidomide off the market in the U.S.

X Liberal,

I am slightly confused Sir, perhaps you are addressing another?

The Supreme Law as in The Non Aggression Principle, I listed above is FULL of Rights, ALL human Rights. No one has more or less than another, all are equal….

I agree with both you and your wife, that rights are equal to ALL humans, regardless of sex, gender, race or whatever.

Thank You For Your Blessing, I am honored and The Same To You Sir!

Peace, Love and Brotherhood,
Through Equal Rights, Equal Firepower and Civility.

Tahn

Okay Folks this is the last entry on this as we have other Chickens to fry such as beam placement of our log home in the American Redoubt this week!

Overall thanks for your comments and we’re in the process of incorporating your advice in our future writings to complete this project. Those that called us a terrorist group or drag queen or other names we cannot use your advice—there’s nowhere to add that into the revisions. But thanks anyways. We have deduced that the US Constitution must stand as is, but amending it and writing legislation around it are the only options to safeguard our human society (safeguard from the Liberal resistance—chaos). Those that made reference to a Libertarian Constitutional version we’re researching and will update our project accordingly. Good tips!

Finally to clear up any misconceptions and hold the name calling to a roar, an angle that we took for this project is that equal human rights have never been about job placement, paycheck equality, and retirement accounts. No, that is the modern day feminist bent on human equal rights. Statistics demonstrate, most American women (in fact 80%) would come out of the workforce if they could. So equal rights to them has nothing to do with careers or inventions but families. BTW, technology invented such as the microchip, Kevlar, computer programming, etc. was always the next step in the progression of human advancement. It has no bearing on gender but the building blocks of advancements prior. My family will continue to use those technologies in the future.

Now that we understand that our human equality approach is not from an employment perspective because almost all women do not want that equality, we did bake out one scenario of women working outside the homes and men staying in the home as the non-wage earning spouse. However, our research found that almost exclusively women do not or will not financially support a stay-at-home husband. The underlining factor statistics did highlight, is that with a one wage earning spouse and one stay-at-home spouse in the family there are much less law suites, divorces, abortions, terminations at work, incarcerations, and a host of other ills in the society, essentially chaos. Remember Lefties want to implement chaos into human society, and then the people will cry out to the government to control them.

Let’s review our findings that the minority of women who want to have an avenue out of the homes fail to look at. With women leaving the homemaker role and entering the workforce, over $1-trillion in lawsuits have been sued from corporate America for inequality, the divorce rate shot up from 8% to 62%, over 58-million babies aborted (its currently a women’s right to choose and not a man’s right)—abortion was illegal when women were in the homes, job security has been abolished as men are fired or downsized when once they worked for the same company for 30 years and retirement bestowed on his wife, arrests by law enforcement on men dramatically has increased as also incarceration times for relationship related crimes, young men go off to war and have no wives to come home too, sexual harassment and rape culture laws are in place to snare men who are barred from marriage at an early age (most women are in college for many years and don’t consider marriage to 30 or even 40) and the breakdown of the American family is unprecedented.

Again, if equal rights means equal paycheck, then my wife and I stand with the other 80% of American women where equality is keeping a family together and on equal par with other American families ensuring a strong nation irrespective of gender equality. Now see the chaos? A two-parent home with one wage earner and nonwage-earner configuration is best for society. To even take it one step further, our research demonstrates that society works best when the Patriarch provides and the Matriarch is provided for. Hope this makes sense to everyone on our angles of research? This information does affect Preppers and Survivalists as your income may be abruptly halted (something not heard of until women entered the workforce), and your family is under continual attack to include you as a statistic on why Liberals need big government programs / control and your tax dollars to solve the problems they’ve created. We will continue the fight and not allow few feminists to distort human rights granted by the Creator in Heaven—it’s more than a wage-earning job or gender equality.

In the recent words of Bill O’Reilly (prior to him being fired by women accusations—not charged, tried by a jury of his peers, and convicted—but accusations by women that he now looses his career for life), “The Left are about FEELINGS, and Conservatives are about FACTS.” Some of these feedback entries were emotional entries!

Lastly, we also write books, articles, letters, and blog and though we give equal weight to the negative effects of gay rights, black rights, and women rights as they pertain to human rights, we always receive much feedback on the women’s rights aspect and usually none on the other two. If you look at this post, your feedback aligns accordingly.

God Bless,
And we sincerely mean that – God Bless you as you fight for your family’s equality, which includes your husband, wife and children (not gender equality). Please pray for us, as this is not easy stuff to even talk about in some circles, let alone format a solution!
X. Liberal and we are signing off!

Women demonstrated at Trump’s speech today dressed in costumes from “The Handmaid’s Tale.” The more I research this book and movie, the more I realize how similar some of these propositions are to this popular story.

The similarities are frightening. I think the public (Christian and non-Christian) has a sixth sense of the potential for the abuse of religious power which explains why this film is so popular.

Consider what is going on at the Vatican! Men of extreme power are hiding under the cloak of righteousness to perpetrate the most evil acts. Finally, these activities are being brought out into the light for all to see. It has been a prayer of mine for years, to expose the evil for what it is so that all can see the motives behind the actions.

Distortions of Scripture, at the hand of those who claim righteousness, is a long-practiced tradition in the history of mankind. Thankfully, we have the Sadducees and Pharisees to remind us of how not to be and think.

I’ve noticed this last comment and should answer as it is not entirely aligned to the article. It is not about women becoming subservient to men and abused beyond all recognition. Nope! For thousands of years women where under the care of their Provider-men and almost all women throughout history in that configuration without incident. My grandmothers, mother, and mother-in-law were all provided for by men in their family as they never held a wage earning job and speak highly of those men of their marriage. btw. their marriages all lasted till “death do us part.”

This article seems to prove a point, that by removing the role of Homemaker for women, and inserting them into the role of Provider (which by the way statistics prove women are not providing for stay-at-home husbands and actually throw them out of the family when women make more money) that law-suites, divorces, abortions, legal action against men in incarceration and longer term prison sentencing, broken families, men moving around the country for new jobs for repeated firings / changes in their career (not there when women weren’t in the workplace), and many more ills to society in order to accommodate women into a man’s role is what the article is trying to hedge against.

I don’t believe this article is about abusing women, but safe guarding against destroying human society by abusing the family now having no set mother or father.

Reread the article again – the abortions, law suites, divorces, Patriarch job firings, contacts with law-enforcement, male prison sentencing would radically decrease if women would find their place back in the family once again, and not in a place of the God’s given role for the Patriarch of Providing for that family. That’s all!