Scalia’s comments elicited a furor at the website National Journal, where many weighed in to register their disgust at the possibility of another “conservative” justice betrayal. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts  appeared poised to strike down the individual mandate of the Obamacare legislation in late June 2012, but apparently sided with the liberal wing at the last moment.

Appearing in an interview given by Mike Wallace that is to be aired on Fox News Sunday, the originalist stalwart had the following comments:

[Whether or not government can ban high volume magazines and "assault" weapons] will have to be decided in future cases… But there were legal precedents from the days of the Founding Fathers that banned frightening weapons which a constitutional originalist like himself must recognize. There were also “locational limitations” on where weapons could be carried.

Several commenters at National Journal rightly rebutted Scalia’s opinion by pointing out the subjective nature of basing law on what liberals perceive as “frightening” or “menacing,” including hand-held weapons. There were other causes for concern with Justice Scalia’s comments.

Instead of basing his reasoning on inalienable individual rights, such as the rights to private property and self-defense, Scalia expounded on particular 18th century gun practices that preceded the ratification of The Constitution. From this exercise in historical exegesis, he leapt to the conclusion that the several states had the authority to “regulate” the citizens’ right to keep and bear arms.

Scalia thus hedges the recent case record that the Second Amendment is incorporated and binding on the states, which was established in the 2010 Supreme Court case McDonald vs. Chicago that struck down local gun control laws. That followed upon the related gun control case District of Columbia vs. Heller, which also struck down gun regulations.

The record of the Roberts’ course had seemed to be strong on both gun control and free speech issues before the Obamacare case debacle. Roberts’ capricious minimalism (the tendency to yield to the legislature on Constitutional interpretation)  and Scalia’s inconsistency in defending individual rights have many attentive citizens alarmed that gun “regulation” could go the deleterious way of Commerce “regulation.”

Whether or not one agrees with the Constitutional amendment stating that citizens have the right to bear arms, it is empirically rock-solid that citizens’ ability to lawfully carry concealed firearms leads to a 60 percent decrease in multiple-victim public shootings and a 78 percent decrease in victims per attack among the several states.

Nonetheless, the massacre at an Aurora, Colorado theater, a gun-free zone, has given rise to increasingly vocal calls for gun regulations by the Democrat Party. The party even had the audacity to try to slip assault weapons-related gun regulations into an upcoming “cybersecurity” bill, probably after recognizing that the U.S. would not become a party to the UN’s small arms treaty.

Please share this article if you want to alert your fellow citizens about the assaults being made on the Second Amendment!

Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679, was a British philosopher and infidel, who advocated the idea that authority is derived from man under the common consent of the governed. But if authority comes from man, then nothing is moral or immoral, but amoral. According to English philosopher, John Locke, who was diametrically opposed to the philosophy of Hobbes, fundamental rights were the right to “life, liberty and estate”, estate being the right to own property. Thankfully, our founding fathers subscribed to the philosophy of John Locke, as reflected in some of the founding documents. The phrase “inalienable rights” from the Declaration of Independence speaks of authority that transcends man. Inalienable rights are sometimes called natural rights. Inalienable means they are fixed and not contingent on or awarded by human power. The right to life is an unalienable power.

All three of these rights, life, liberty and property are being challenged increasingly in America. The right to life was challenged and blown away years ago, when the right to murder innocent, unborn children in the womb was legalized. Our liberties are under fire as an ever growing government continues to encroach on “we the people” with insane rulings by agenda driven judges, from the right to own firearms, to the right to disagree with and voice an opinion against that which is perverse and abnormal, in the realm of what defines marriage and family. And certainly, the right to own property is challenged through eminent domain cases, with an increase in abuse, as a philosophy of socialism continues to grow among elected officials. By its own admission, the Federal Government owns more than 600,000,000 acres of land with this amount increasing every year. Woven into the fabric of the founding of this nation was the right to own property.

Ultimately, the recognition of an ultimate authority points to The Ultimate Authority, the God of the universe, Jehovah God of the Bible. And this is why people kick against the idea of absolutes and authority so vehemently. If there is a God, then we must all face Him one day, and standing before Him means accountability to authority. A prevailing theme throughout the Bible is the theme of authority. Whether the story is the Garden of Eden, Israel in Egypt or the Promised Land, the saga of the united and divided kingdoms, Jesus in the Gospels or the presentation of the King of Kings in the book of Revelation, authority is the final issue. Will man rebel against God, or will man submit to God? That is always the final issue. Either God is the absolute authority of the universe, to which all men are accountable, or He is not. If He is not the final authority, then nothing matters, man can live as he chooses and die, with no reward or punishment. Or man can submit to God, through repentance and faith in the blood of Jesus, live for Him, keep His commandments, and enter into the joy of his Lord at death.

You know, if I’m wrong and atheists are right, then no one has to give account to a higher power. But If I’m right…………….. You tell me the best common sense choice.

Joseph Harris has been a college professor and pastor since 1987 and his writings have appeared on WND, Sword of the Lord, Intellectual Conservative, Conservative Daily News, Canada Free Press, Land of the Free, and The Post Chronicle. joey@headricks.com

A law expresses an absolute and an absolute establishes authority. If there is one thing liberals hate, it is an absolute authority. Where does authority begin? It must have a source. There are basically two views which contradict one another. (1) Authority is derived from man, as groups collectively bestow power upon government or magistrates, to govern the people, or (2) Authority is derived from God, then man organizes government, based upon the commandments and principles of God. If authority comes from man, then there are no absolutes. What man deems to be wrong, is indeed wrong, as long as man declares it to be wrong. But if man decides to change the law, then what was wrong is no longer wrong. However, if God declares something to be wrong, then an absolute is established, which is immutable.

Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679, was a British philosopher and infidel, who advocated the idea that authority is derived from man under the common consent of the governed. But if authority comes from man, then nothing is moral or immoral, but amoral. According to English philosopher, John Locke, who was diametrically opposed to the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes, fundamental rights were the right to “life, liberty and estate”, estate being the right to own property. Thankfully, our founding fathers subscribed to the philosophy of John Locke, as reflected in some of the founding documents. The phrase “inalienable rights” from the Declaration of Independence speaks of authority that transcends man. Inalienable rights are sometimes called natural rights. Inalienable means they are fixed and not contingent on or awarded by human power. The right to life is an unalienable power.

All three of these rights, life, liberty and property are being challenged increasingly in America. The right to life was challenged and blown away years ago, when the right to murder innocent, unborn children in the womb was legalized. Our liberties are under fire as an ever growing government continues to encroach on “we the people” with insane rulings by agenda driven judges, from the right to own firearms, to the right to disagree with and voice an opinion against that which is perverse and abnormal, in the realm of what defines marriage and family. And certainly, the right to own property is challenged through eminent domain cases, with an increase in abuse, as a philosophy of socialism continues to grow among elected officials. By its own admission, the Federal Government owns more than 600,000,000 acres of land with this amount increasing every year. Woven into the fabric of the founding of this nation was the right to own property.

Ultimately, the recognition of an ultimate authority points to The Ultimate Authority, the God of the universe, Jehovah God of the Bible. And this is why people kick against the idea of absolutes and authority so vehemently. If there is a God, then we must all face Him one day, and standing before Him means accountability to authority. A prevailing theme throughout the Bible is the theme of authority. Whether the story is the Garden of Eden, Israel in Egypt or the Promised Land, the saga of the united and divided kingdoms, Jesus in the Gospels or the presentation of the King of Kings in the book of Revelation, authority is the final issue. Will man rebel against God, or will man submit to God? That is always the final issue. Either God is the absolute authority of the universe, to which all men are accountable, or He is not. If He is not the final authority, then nothing matters, man can live as he chooses and die, with no reward or punishment. Or man can submit to God, through repentance and faith in the blood of Jesus, live for Him, keep His commandments, and enter into the joy of his Lord at death.

You know, if I’m wrong and atheists are right, then no one has to give account to a higher power. But If I’m right…………….. You tell me the best common sense choice.

Joseph Harris has been a college professor and pastor since 1987 and his writings have appeared on WND, Sword of the Lord, Intellectual Conservative, Conservative Daily News, Canada Free Press, Land of the Free, and The Post Chronicle. joey@headricks.com

There is a pretty easy explanation as to why the vast majority of New Year’s resolutions don’t make it past the fifth of January. It’s because for most of them, they are unrealistic goals motivated by a desire for radical change in one’s life. And while radical change is not necessarily a bad thing, it becomes impossible when you are trying to fit that change into a one second window between 11:59:59 on December 31st and midnight on January 1st.

The typical New Year’s battle cry, things like “I’m going to lose 50 pounds this year” or “I’m going to be a better person this year” are indeed admirable goals and I am not saying for a second that we should not set them and move toward them. What usually happens though is that at the first sign of an obstacle moving towards these goals, most people fold up like a cheap tent and say “to heck with it!” We expect ourselves to change behaviors and positions that have probably been with us for many years and we literally expect it overnight. With the deck stacked so heavily and unfairly against us, it’s no wonder why the average New Year’s resolution does not last for more than a fortnight.

The apostle Paul tells us in Romans 6:14 that “For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.” The “law” under the Mosaic covenant, was and is a very unforgiving thing. Paul further talks about not knowing what sin is, if it had not been for the law itself. The same is true for us today.

There are two types of citizens in our world. Simply put, there are law-abiding citizens and non-law-abiding citizens – who we like to call, criminals. In order for a person to remain a law-abiding citizen, they must, well, obey all the laws. In order to become a criminal, one only needs to break the law. So when we apply the “law” to the treatment of our New Year’s Resolutions, we are already setting ourselves up for failure. The Law is pass/fail.

You will make mistakes, hence the Grace.

Instead, we should approach January 1st from a different perspective. Yes, it’s a new year, new calendar and, it is as good a time as any to start fresh in many aspects of our lives. We should also realize that many of the bad habits we have did not develop overnight and to expect them to right themselves with the click of a clock is simply unrealistic.

Again the Apostle Paul tells us in Romans 12:2, “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.” The objective is to be transformed – past tense – but the process is by the renewing – present tense – of our minds. We will always to be in the process of renewal, less about a destination and more about destiny.

With this is mind, I call on all of you to trade in the New Year’s Resolution for the Grace Revolution. The Grace Revolution is based on a complete turning over (revolution) from one state to another, but through grace, not law. It means that we need to realize going in that we will make mistakes. Expect to fall off the wagon, if fact, plan on it; and don’t just plan on it, plan FOR it.

I have taught the Dave Ramsey “Financial Peace University” course over a dozen times and one of the many things I like about it is that he makes you budget for your mistakes. He calls it “blow” money – for when you blow it. This is the grace mentality.

It’s probably no wonder why budgets and diets perish early in our list of resolutions. We don’t budget for our failures, perhaps because they have such a stigma attached to them. Yet when you look at truly successful people, you will realize that they all hold the “2,000 ways not to make a light bulb” philosophy close to them. This tenacious spirit will invariably lead to success.

So, plan for your mismanaging of the budget. Cut yourself some slack when your temperature rises a few times in traffic. Allow for habits to develop. Schedule your feasts!

Aim low and short, take baby steps and realize that some of those will be backwards. If you do this day by day, perhaps hour by hour, you will have the privilege of looking up one fine day and realizing that those distant goals that seemed so far off are within arm’s reach after all.

All children skin their knees, some of us more than others. Regardless, they all have one thing in common – they grow. That growing cannot be rushed, only time will cultivate your harvest. So, instead of being frustrated over what you may see as a lack of progress, enjoy the journey and, I bet by this time next year, many of those seemingly insurmountable mountains will have indeed been removed and cast into the sea!

To all: Happy New Year.

You have absolutely GOT to be kidding me!

I should have known. We have reached a point in our society where nothing makes sense anymore! Up is down, right is wrong, wrong is right, white is black, black is white…. and I could go on and on with analogies. However, that will get us nowhere, really.

I try to be an optimist. I am a Bible believer, so I know the power of prayer. I also know what Scripture says about what will come in what we call “the last days”. Have we reached “the last days?” Well, I do not know for certain, but all signs sure seem to be pointing that way!

Where my faith, knowing what Scripture says will come, and reality clash are my feelings with everything. I am not one to give up in the sense of, “there’s just no point in going on.” I KNOW I have to keep fighting the good fight until my last day comes, whether it is by my death through old age or other occurrences or if it is by way of the rapture of the Church which yes, I do most certainly believe in.

I know that God says, “Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord”. (Romans 12:19)

I also believe that there are consequences for our actions. I believe there are certain actions in this life that are punishable by death. Yes, I have Bible Scripture that I use to base this belief on. (Romans 1:28-32 ; Acts 25:10-11 ; Romans 13:1-4) but that is not the point of this article.

Now we have a man who will get away with cold-blooded murder because he is feigning incompetency! Yes, I am calling him a liar, a manipulator, and a game-player playing the system.

This very same man went into court sneering the first couple of times he appeared in court. Now, according to one report I heard on TV, all of a sudden he is “rocking back and forth”.

Please do not get me wrong. I absolutely believe he is a mentally disturbed man. I believe that is quite obvious from his initial actions of murder and attempted murder back in January. I believe there is proof of that from other incidences that have been reported after the attack happened.

Now there will be no justice for Ms. Giffords, the other survivors, and those who were killed that day. Now our tax-paying dollars will have to be used to keep this man alive until the day he dies.

I do not for one minute believe he can be rehabilitated. He has shown absolutely no remorse- even today in court. He is relishing in the fact that he killed people. To me this speaks volumes for his mental well-being, or lack thereof.

So what is the answer? I will be called “inhumane” because I would rather he be put to death.

I will be called selfish, cold, uncaring, un-Christ like for thinking he deserves the death penalty.

I believe justice should be served.

Today that did not happen.

Thankfully this was just the federal case. Maybe the State of Arizona will not be so politically correct!

God help us all.

My continued prayers are with Ms. Giffords, her family and friends, and all the other lives that were affected by this tragedy.