{"id":75404,"date":"2021-12-17T16:34:57","date_gmt":"2021-12-17T22:34:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=75404"},"modified":"2021-12-17T16:34:57","modified_gmt":"2021-12-17T22:34:57","slug":"75404","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=75404","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"<p>BLUF:<br \/>\nThe\u00a0<em>Chronicle of Higher Education<\/em>\u00a0today is out with an article bemoaning J.D. Vance for saying \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.chronicle.com\/article\/the-professors-are-the-enemy\">professors are the enemy<\/a>.\u201d<br \/>\n<strong>I wonder where he could possibly have gotten such an outlandish idea?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.powerlineblog.com\/archives\/2021\/12\/the-left-vs-the-constitution.php\">THE LEFT VS. THE CONSTITUTION<\/a><\/p>\n<p>One reason the left hates the American Constitution, and wishes to replace it, is that its embedded principles along with much of its explicit text is foursquare against the two main purposes of the left: class struggle and race struggle. Never mind the drive to abolish the electoral college, or the Senate, or admit new states to increase the odds of Democratic election victories. Just take in how the left wants to rewrite\u2014which means abolish\u2014the Bill of Rights.<\/p>\n<p>The\u00a0<em>Boston Globe<\/em>\u00a0is currently running a feature series about how to \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/apps.bostonglobe.com\/ideas\/graphics\/2021\/12\/editing-the-constitution\/\">edit<\/a>\u201d the Constitution, which of course means replacing it in practice with an egalitarian Constitution that would place much more power to control people and resources in elites like the kind of people you find in the editorial suites of the\u00a0<em>Boston Globe<\/em>. How convenient.<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>Take, for example, the suggestion on\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/apps.bostonglobe.com\/ideas\/graphics\/2021\/12\/editing-the-constitution\/redo-the-first-two-amendments\">how to rewrite the First and Second Amendments<\/a>\u00a0from Mary Anne Franks, the Michael R. Klein Distinguished Scholar Chair at the University of Miami School of Law and the author of\u00a0<em>The Cult of the Constitution: Our Deadly Devotion to Guns and Free Speech<\/em>. The first two Amendments \u201cwould be improved by explicitly situating individual rights within the framework of \u201cdomestic tranquility\u201d and the \u201cgeneral welfare\u201d set out in the Constitution\u2019s preamble.<\/p>\n<p>How so? For a new First Amendment, Franks wants this (with the important parts in bold):<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p class=\"paragraph content\">Every person has the right to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and petition of the government for redress of grievances,\u00a0<strong>consistent with the rights of others to the same and subject to responsibility for abuses. All conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"paragraph content\">Both the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion shall be respected by the government. The government may not single out any religion for interference or endorsement, nor may it force any person to accept or adhere to any religious belief or practice.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>And just who will decide what constitutes an \u201cabuse\u201d that will be curbed? It isn\u2019t hard to guess about this. Get ready for the federal speech police, and an elaborate national speech code.<\/p>\n<p>The second paragraph really doesn\u2019t add much or improve on the original Establishment clause, and might even backfire on progressives. Shouldn\u2019t that last clause\u2014\u201dnor may it force any person to accept or adhere to any religious belief or practice\u201d\u2014apply to the religion of Wokism?<\/p>\n<p>For the Second Amendment, Franks says:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The right to safeguard one\u2019s life should not be conflated with or reduced to the right to use a weapon, especially a weapon that is so much more likely to inflict injury and death than to avoid it. Far better would be an amendment that guarantees a meaningful right to bodily autonomy and obligates the government to implement reasonable measures to protect public health and safety.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The government is doing such a<em>\u00a0great job<\/em>\u00a0of protecting public health and safety in places like San Francisco and Portland right now\u2014by all means let\u2019s have more of these kind of government \u201cobligations\u201d to protect.<\/p>\n<p>But check out the proposed text of Prof. Franks\u2019s 2nd Amendment:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>All people have the right to bodily autonomy consistent with the right of other people to the same, including the right to defend themselves against unlawful force and the right of self-determination in reproductive matters. The government shall take reasonable measures to protect the health and safety of the public as a whole.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>I like how her 2nd Amendment morphs into a constitutional guarantee of abortion, while leaving the right to bear arms highly ambiguous at best. Let me fix it: you no longer have a right to bear arms, but you do have the right to cut off arms\u2014and legs, and heads, etc.\u2014of the unborn.<\/p>\n<p>P.S. The\u00a0<em>Chronicle of Higher Education<\/em>\u00a0today is out with an article bemoaning J.D. Vance for saying \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.chronicle.com\/article\/the-professors-are-the-enemy\">professors are the enemy<\/a>.\u201d I wonder where he could possibly have gotten such an outlandish idea?<\/p>\n<p>P.P.S. So far I haven\u2019t seen a proposed climate change amendment. What\u2019s taking so long? Doesn\u2019t the\u00a0<em>Boston Globe<\/em>\u00a0know we\u2019re in a world-ending crisis?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>BLUF: The\u00a0Chronicle of Higher Education\u00a0today is out with an article bemoaning J.D. Vance for saying \u201cprofessors are the enemy.\u201d I wonder where he could possibly have gotten such an outlandish idea? THE LEFT VS. THE CONSTITUTION One reason the left hates the American Constitution, and wishes to replace it, is that its embedded principles along &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=75404\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-75404","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-enemies-foreign-domestic","category-rights"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75404","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=75404"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75404\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":75405,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75404\/revisions\/75405"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=75404"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=75404"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=75404"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}