WELCOME! Listed below are 25 questions and answers dealing with government and the role of government. These were the first 25 questions taken from book "What the Constitution REALLY Means" by Larry Wilcox. I hope you will take the time and really read and ponder the questions and answers. After you have read, pondered and prayed about these question and answers, please put the new knowledge to work and get involved! Enjoy!
1. QUESTION: Which was created on this earth first, people or government? ANSWER: It should be obvious to everyone that individuals had to be created before governments could be formed. 2. QUESTION: Was there any need for a government with only one person on the earth? ANSWER: Since only one person existed, he could not employ anyone else to help him protect his interests. Therefore, no government was possible. 3. QUESTION: Was it possible to have a government with only two people on the earth? ANSWER: It should be obvious that each could cancel the other's vote so no government was possible. If both agreed, there was no need for any government. 4. QUESTION: How many people were necessary in order to form a government? ANSWER: At least three people would be necessary so one could hire the second to protect himself from the third. 5. QUESTION: From whom do individuals receive their rights? ANSWER: Man's rights are a gift from God, our Creator. By the time the Declaration of Independence was penned by Thomas Jefferson and signed by the delegates to the Continental Congress, this concept was so ingrained in the founders of our country that they signed the following: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights," 6. QUESTION: What are the three principal rights which are given to individuals by God? ANSWER: The right to life, the right to ownership and control of property and the right to liberty are indispensable if the individual is to exercise free agency. Former United States Supreme Court Justice, George Sutherland of Utah in a speech before the New York Bar Association on Jan. 21, 1921, stated: "It is not the right of property which is protected, but the right TO property. Property, per se, had no rights; but the individual - the man- has three great rights, equally sacred from arbitrary interference; the RIGHT TO HIS LIFE, THE RIGHT TO HIS LIBERTY, AND THE RIGHT TO HIS PROPERTY. The three rights are so bound together as to be essentially ONE right. To give a man his life, but deny him his liberty, is to take from him all that makes life worth living. To give him liberty but take from him the property which is the fruit and badge of his liberty, is to still leave him a slave." (Quoted by President David O. McKay, CR 10/62 p.6) 7. QUESTION: Who can deprive an individual of his right to life, liberty, or property? ANSWER: Since these rights are a gift from God, it follows that only He can revoke the gift. However, a man may give up his life or his liberty or his property voluntarily. Moreover, he may forfeit his life, liberty or property as the result of disobedience to the laws of God or the laws of man which are based on the laws of God. On the other hand, any attempt by our servants in government to take an individual's, liberty or property beyond that necessary under the United States Constitution as it was originally conceived, violates the contract between the people who created the government and those serving in the government. 8. QUESTION: What other right is necessary in order to uphold the rights of the individual to his life, liberty, and ownership and control of his property? ANSWER: God has given every individual the right to use defensive force to protect his life, liberty and property. Without the right of self-defense the rights to life, liberty and property are non-existent. Writing about Moroni who was chief Captain of the Nephite armed forces in B.C. 72, Mormon has the following to say: "And Moroni was a strong and mighty man; he was a man of a perfect understanding; yea, a man that did not delight in bloodshed; a man whose soul did joy in the liberty and the freedom of his country, and his brethren from bondage and slavery. "Yea, a man whose heart did swell with thanksviving to his God, for the many privileges and blessings which he bestowed upon his people; a man who did labor exceedingly for the welfare and safety of his people. "Yea, he was man who was firm in the faith of Christ, and he had sworn with an oath to defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion, even to the loss of his blood. "Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives. "Yea, verily, verily I say unto you, if all men had been, and were, and ever would be, like unto Moroni, behold, the very powers of hell would have been shaken forever; yea, the devil would never have power over the hearts of the children of men. "Behold, he was a man like unto Ammon, the son of Mosiah, yea, and even the other sons of Mosiah, yea, and also Alma and his sons, for they were all men of God."(Alma 48:11-14,17,18) Samuel Adams in his essay, "Rights of the Colonists," wrote the following in 1772: "Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these; First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of a self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature. All men have a right to remain in a state of nature as long as they please; and in case of intolerable oppression, civil or religious, to leave the society they belong to, and enter into another. When men enter into society, it is by voluntary consent; and they have a right to demand and insist upon the performance of such conditions and previous limitations as form an equitable original compact." (THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, quoted on page 365) 9. QUESTION: Does any individual or group have the right to use aggressive force against any other individual or group? ANSWER: Nowhere in the laws of God is the individual given any right to commit an act of aggression against anyone. In fact, after a thousand years in which the Nephites had defended themselves against the aggressive acts of their enemies, the Lamanites, they made the fatal mistake of swearing to attack the Lamanites. Mormon records the event as follows: "And they did swear by the heavens, and also by the throne of God, that they would go up to battle against their enemies, and would cut them off from the face of the land. "And it came to pass that I, Mormon, did utterly refuse from this time forth to be a commander and a leader of this people, because of their wickedness and abomination. "Behold, I had led them, notwithstanding their wickedness I had led them many times to battle, and had loved them, according to the love of God which was in me, with all my heart; and my soul had been poured out in prayer unto my God all the day long for them; nevertheless, it was without faith, because of the hardness of their hearts. "And thrice have I delivered them out of the hands of their enemies, and they have repented not of their sin. "And when they sworn by all that had been forbidden them by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, that they would go up unto their enemies to battle, and avenge themselves of the blood of their brethren, behold the voice of the Lord came unto me saying: "Vengeance is mine, and I will repay; and because this people repented not after I had delivered them, behold, they shall be cut off from the face of the earth." (Mormon 3: 10-15) Because it bears repeating, Mormon also said, "Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives." (Alma 48:14) 10. QUESTION: Who had the right to use defensive force in order to preserve his life, liberty and property? ANSWER: Every individual has the right to use defensive force to protect himself from those who use aggressive force. Freedom would be impossible without the right to protect life, liberty and property from those who would take them by force. In Chapter 14 of Genesis we find the account of Abram acting upon this principle to rescue his nephew, Lot. "And when Abram heard that Lot, his brother's son, was taken captive, he armed his trained men, and they which were born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued unto Dan. "And he divided himself against them, he and his men, by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which was on the left hand of Damascus. "And he brought back Lot, his brother's son, and all his goods, and the women also, and the people. . . . "And Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine; and he break bread and blest it; and he blest the wine; he being the priest of the most high God. "And he gave to Abram, and he blessed him, and said, Blessed Abram, thou are a man of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth; "And blessed is the name of the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand." (Genesis 14:13-15, 17-19, Inspired Version) Describing this type of situation, Samuel Adams had the following to say: "In a state of nature men may, as the patriarchs did, employ hired servants for the defense of their lives, liberties, and property; and they should pay them reasonable wages. Government was instituted for the purpose of common defense, and those who hold the reins of government have an equitable, natural right to an honorable support from the same principle which that 'the laborer is worthy of his hire.' But then the same community which they serve ought to be the assessors of their pay. Governors have no right to seek and take what they please: by this, instead of being content with the station assigned them, that of honorable servants of the society, they would soon become absolute masters, despots, and tyrants. Hence, as a private man has a right to say what wages he will give in his private affairs, so has a community to determine what they will give and grant of their substance for the administration of public affairs. And, in both cases, more are ready to offer their service at the proposed and stipulated price than are able and willing to perform their duty." (THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, quoted on pages 366-367) 11. QUESTION: Since each individual has the right to use defensive force, could he delegate authority to another person or group of persons to act in his behalf? ANSWER: Delegation of authority is a time honored principle which is usually used to free the one holding authority to work on more important matters. Those to whom authority is delegated are servants or employees of the one doing the delegating and the authority which they exercise under the leader's direction in no way diminishes the leader's own authority. Each individual receives his rights or authority from God. He, alone, can delegate authority to his servants who make up the government. Samuel Adams wrote as follows: "In the state of nature every man is, under God, judge and sole judge of his own rights and of the injuries done him. By entering into society he agrees to an arbiter or indifferent judge between him and his neighbor; but he no more renounces his original right than by taking a cause out of the ordinary course of law, and leaving the decision to referees or indifferent arbitrators. In the last case, he must pay the referees for time and trouble. He should also be willing to pay his just quota for the support of government, the law, and the constitution; the end of which is to furnish indifferent and impartial judges." (THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, quoted on page 366) 12. QUESTION: Can an individual delegate to another individual or group of individuals the authority to break a law of God? ANSWER: The answer to this question should be obvious and the correct answer is NO! Socialism, the "welfare" state, communism, fascism or any other type of dictatorship is based on the idea that groups of two or more persons can break the Laws of God with impunity as long as they are functioning as a government or part of a government. The communist and socialists say that, "the end justifies the means." In other words the goal sanctifies the method. The "welfare" statists in our country and other countries justify their actions on the same basis. In order to cover their unconstitutional practices in this country our servants in government use the term "welfare" to describe these activities which transfer control of goods from the person who owns them or earns them to someone who does not own them or earn them. Writing in 1850, Frederic Bastiat in his essay, "The Law", defines this transfer of ownership as follows: "But how is legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime." ("The Law," Frederic Bastiat, page 25) It must be recognized that this act of legal plunder has many faces. No matter how "honorable" the goal if property, which includes money, is handled by those in government as explained above that action is immoral and unconstitutional. It violates the function of government which is to protect life, liberty and property from the aggressive acts of others including our servants in the government. 13. QUESTION: What is the name given in English to that organization which the people founded in the United States to protect their lives, liberty and property? ANSWER: Government. In Webster's 1828 edition of his dictionary, he defines it as follows: "The system of polity in a state; that form of fundamental rules and principles by which a nation or state is governed, or by which individual members of a body politic are to regulate their social actions; a constitution, either written and public officers are prescribed and defined;" 14. QUESTION: Are governments created by people or are people created by governments? ANSWERS: Governments are the creation of individuals and individuals are the creation of God. The flow of authority is from God to the people and from the people to the government. Since this is true it should be evident that our servants who at any time make up the government cannot exercise any more authority than can the individual citizen. 15. QUESTION: Why do people form governments? ANSWER: The purpose of government formation is to protect the lives, the liberties and the properties of peaceful citizens from unpeaceful citizens. That purpose is described in the Declaration of Independence by our founding fathers in the following manner: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.- "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,-" The Doctrine and Covenants 134:2 puts it this way: "We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life." 16. QUESTION: What is a peaceful citizen? ANSWER: He is a person who obeys the laws of God. He never commits an act of aggression against any other individual. He does not resort to force except to defend his life, liberty, livelihood or property from an aggressive person. Leonard E. Read wrote as follows in his excellent book ANYTHING THAT'S PEACEFUL on page 33: "Defensive force is never an initial action. It comes into play only secondarily, that is, as the antidote to aggressive force or violence. Any individual has a moral right to defend his life, the fruits of his labor (that which sustains his life), and is liberty- by demeanor, by persuasion, or with a club if necessary. Defensive force is morally warranted." 17. QUESTION: What is an unpeaceful citizen? ANSWER: He is a person who violates the laws of God. He engages in acts or aggression against other individuals. In other words, he initiates action against others to deprive them of their liberties, properties or livelihoods. In the same book quoted above, Leonard E. Read, on page 33 explains, "The word 'violence,' as here used, refers to a particular kind of force. Customarily, the word is applied indiscriminately to two distinct kinds of force, each as different from the other as an olive branch differs from a gun. One is defensive or repellent force. The other is initiated or aggressive force. If someone were to initiate such an action as flying at you with a dagger, that would be an example of aggressive force. It is this kind of force I call strife or violence. The force you would employ to repel the violence I would call defensive force. "Try to think of a single instance where aggressive force-strife or violence-is normally warranted. There is none. Violence is morally insupportable! 18. QUESTION: What is the correct method for forming a government? ANSWER: The only legitimate method that can be used is creation by the people who hold their rights from God. They may delegate authority to whomever they please as long as everyone has reasonable representation or if the group of people is small, they may create the government as a group. It must be kept in mind that the government created cannot exceed the authority of any one individual. Also, the delegation of authority is only temporary. Its duration is determined by how well those servants in government keep within the bounds set by God in His laws to men. The moment those servants step beyond these bounds they destroy the compact between the creators, the people, and the created, those servants who make up the government. The Declaration of Independence reads as follows on this subject: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, (the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness) it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.-* 19. QUESTION: Does the delegation of authority prohibit the individual from using the right from which the authority is derived? ANSWER: Since the individual receives the right from God and since God is the only one who can revoke the right, it is clear that the use of the right continues with the individual. The only reason for delegation of authority is to make it possible for the individual to perform his primary functions more efficiently. For instance, and this the only authority legitimately delegated to our servants in government, the individual delegates authority to servants in government to keep the peace so he does not have to carry arms at all times to protect himself and his property. Samuel Adams, who wrote "The Rights of the Colonists" in 1772 put it this way, "In short, it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defense of those very rights; the principle of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right the eternal law or reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave." (THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, quoted on page 368) 20. QUESTION: Does the servant in government acquire any rights when he is hired by the people? ANSWER: Rights are inherent in the individual as a gift from God. No right is conferred by the people when an individual is hired to become a part of the government. Authority is conferred upon our servants in government to help upon our servants in government to help protect our inherent and unalienable rights to life, liberty and private property. Rights exist in the individual but cannot be transferred to our servants in government. Even though our servants are permitted to help us protect our rights, authority is not delegated to them to prohibit us from using our rights when it is necessary. The only right which we hold from which we can delegate authority to our servants in the right of self-defense. However, the fact that we delegate authority to our servants to help in our defense does not remove our right to defend ourselves. That right is unalienable and cannot be transferred. 21. QUESTION: What is the result when our servants exceed their authority? ANSWER: When the contract between the employer, the people, and the employee, our servants in government, is broken by our servants, the contract ceases to be binding and the authority of our servants ceases to exist. President John Taylor had the following to say on this subject: "It is said in the Doctrine and Covenants, that he that keepeth the laws of God, hath no need to break the laws of the land. It is further explained in section 98, what is meant in relation to this That all laws which are constitutional must be obeyed, as follows: 'And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them. 'And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me; 'Therefore I the Lord justify you and your brethern of the Church in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land. And as pertaining to laws of man, whatsoever is more or less than these cometh of evil.' "That is, taking this nation as an example, all laws that are proper and correct, and all obligations entered into which are no violative of the constitution, then the compact between the rulers and the ruled is broken and the obligation ceases to be binding. Just as a person agreeing to purchase anything and to pay a certain amount for it, if he receives the article bargained for, and does no pay its price, he violates his contract; but if he does not receive the article he is not required to pay for it." (President John Taylor, 1884, JD-26:350) The following from President Joseph F. Smith is also relevant to the above question; "We are told here that no man need break the laws of the land who will keep the laws of God. (D&C 58:21) But this is further defined by the passage which I read afterwards - the law of the land, which all have no need to break, is that law which is the Constitutional law of the land, and that is a as God himself has defined it. And whatsoever in more or less than this cometh of evil. (D&C 98:4-10) Now it seems to me that this makes this matter so clear that it is not possible for any man who professes to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to make any mistakes, or to be in doubt as to the course he should pursue under the command of God in relation to the observance of the laws of the land. I maintain that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has ever been faithful to the constitutional laws of our country. I maintain also, that I have a right to this opinion, as an American citizen, as one who was not only born on American soil, but who descended from parents who for generations were born in America. I have a right to interpret the law in this manner, and to form my own conclusions and express my opinions thereon, regardless of the opinions of other men. "I ask myself, What law have you broken? What constitutional law have you not observed? I am bound not only by allegiance to the govern- ment of the United States, but by the actual command of God Almighty, to observe and obey every constitutional law of the land, and without hesitancy I declare to this congregation that I have never violated, nor transgressed any law, I am not amenable to any penalties of the law, because I have endeavored from my youth up to be a law-abiding citizen, and not only so, but to be a peacemaker, a preacher of righteousness, and not only to preach righteousness by word, but by example. What therefore have I to fear? The Lord Almighty requires this people to observe the laws of the land, to be subject to the 'powers that be,' so far as they abide by the fundamental principles of good government, by He will hold them responsible if they will pass unconstitutional measures and frame unjust and proscriptive laws, as did Nebuchadnezzer and Darius, in relation to the three Hebrew children and Daniel. If lawmakers have a mind to violate their oath, break their covenants and their faith with the people, and depart from the provisions of the Constitution where is the law human or divine, which binds me, as an individual, to outwardly and openly proclaim my acceptance of their acts? "I firmly believe that the only way in which we can be sustained in regard to this matter by God our Heavenly Father is by following the illustrious examples we find in holy writ. And while we regret, and look with sorrow upon the acts of men who seek to bring us into bondage and to oppress us, we must obey God, for He had declared that in obeying the laws which He has given us we will not necessarily break the constitutional laws of the land." (President Joseph F. Smith, 1882, JD- 23:70,71) 22. QUESTION: What is the right and the duty of the people when laws are used to create and maintain tyranny? ANSWER: The Declaration of Independence answers the above question as follows: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. THAT WHENEVER ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT BECOMES DESTRUCTIVE OF THESE ENDS, IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO ALTER OR TO ABOLISH IT, AND TO INSTITUTED NEW GOVERNMENT, LAYING ITS FOUNDATION ON SUCH PRINCIPLES AND ORGANIZING ITS POWERS IN SUCH FORM, AS TO THEM SHALL SEEM MOST LIKELY TO EFFECT THEIR SAFETY AND HAPPINESS. . . .But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object invices a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
23. QUESTION: What is the responsibility of the individual when laws are written that violate the Constitution and the laws of God? ANSWER: The D&C 134:5 states that it is our responsibility to "sustain and uphold" the government only so long as the laws uphold our inherent and inalienable rights. It reads as follows: "We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience." On this same subject, William Blackstone in his COMMENTARIES has the following to say: "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these" To instance in the case of murder; this is expressly forbidden by the divine; and demonstrably by the natural law; and from these prohibitions arises the true unlawfullness of this crime. Those human laws that annex a punishment to it do not at all increase its moral guilt, or superadd and fresh obligation in foro conscientiae (in the court of conscience) to abstain from its perpetration. Nay, if any human law should allow or enjoin us to commit it, we are bound to transgress the human law, or else we must offend both the natural and the divine." (THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, quoted on page 143) The following from John Locke will throw further light on the above question: "But though this be a State of Liberty, yet it is not a State License; thought Man in that State have an uncontrollable Liberty, to dispose of his Person or Possessions, yet he has not Liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any Creature in his Possession, but where some nobler Use, than its bare Preservation calls for it. The State of Nature has a Law of Nature to govern it, which obliges every one; And Reason, which is that Law, teaches all Mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possessions. For Men being all the Workmanship of one Omnipotent, and infinitely wise Maker; All the Servants of one Sovereign Master, sent in the World by his Order, and about his Business, they are his Property, whose Workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one anothers Pleasure; And being furnished with like Faculties, sharing all in one Community of Nature, there cannot be supposed any such Subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made of one another's Uses, as the inferior ranks of Creatures are for ours. Every one as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his Station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own Preservation comes not in Competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of Mankind, and may not unless it be to do Justice on an Offender, take away, or impair the Life, or what tends to the Preservation of the Life, the Liberty, Health, Limb, or Goods of another." (THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE CONSTITUTION, quoted on page 58) 24. QUESTION: According to the preamble to the Constitution, who created the Constitution? ANSWER: The preamble reads, "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." To answer this question accurately it is necessary to examine each of the purposes separately. The first purpose for which the Constitution was formed was to "form a more perfect Union. . ." It was a fact that during the war for Independence the Articles of Confederation often proved inadequate to the conduct of the war. Later most of the States functioned separately and often at odds with each other. Different geographical areas cooperated against other geographical areas. For these and other reasons the framers wanted to create a form of government which would increase the Union among the States. However, it must be recognized that the framers were representatives of the States as well as the people. Because of this they created a framework which restricted the national organization to certain specified areas of conduct. In a letter to Elbridge Gerry of Massachusets dated, Philadelphia, Jan. 26, 1799, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I am for preserving to the States the Powers not yielded by them to the Union, & to the legislature of the Union its constitutional share in the division of powers; and I am not for transferring all the powers of the States to the general govern- ment, & all those of that government to the Executive branch." The second reason or purpose for which the Constitution was written was to "establish justice." Very seldom during the history of the peoples of this earth has justice prevailed for all the citizens of any country. Our founding fathers argued for many years with King George III and Parliament in the ineffectual attempt to obtain justice at their hands. Then they fought a better seven year war for the same reason. It is natural, after these experiences to find our founders attempting to establish justice in their new country. Justice according to the 1828 edition of Noah Webster's dictionary is, "The virtue which consists in giving to every one what is his due;" in law it "consists in distributing to every man that right or equity which the laws of equity require;". . . in other works, "Impartiality." Justice then must require that all citizens are treated fairly, equally and impartially under the law. No one, no matter who he is or what his station in life, should receive any treatment under the law which would benefit him above any of his fellow citizens. The third purpose for establishing the Constitution was to "insure domestic tranquillity," The function of our servants who make up the government is to keep the peace, or to protect peaceful citizens form unpeaceful citizens or aliens. Since this function has to do with domestic tranquillity, it covers those activities which take place within the country. This activity, keeping the peace, is normally handled on a local basis by the county sheriff. However, if the trouble crosses state lines the national government may become involved. Disputes between States can be settled in federal courts under the laws created to serve this purpose. In the case of a rebellion against constitutional laws the national government can step in to protect the rights of the citizens who are not in rebellion. However, as the signers of the Declaration of Independence discovered, our employees who make up the government sometimes become aggressors against their own citizens through writing and enforcing unconstitutional statutes. Because of this problem with Great Britain the signers declared, *We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. . .But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." The fourth reason for creating the Constitution is to "provide for the common defense.,". . . In our society today our servants have substituted the word "provide" for "promote". Our founders used the word promote on purpose. They did not intend to provide for anyone. It was their purpose to encourage individual welfare through freedom to work, to save and to invest... General welfare is promoted only when everyone benefits from what is done. It is just possible that the only way to promote or encourage what is good for everyone is to provide freedom or liberty to everyone. Acts which transfer control of income or property from the owner to the non-owner constitute acts of plunder and do not benefit anyone. Acts which increase freedom within God's law benefit everyone because there is no responsibility without freedom and there is no freedom without responsibility. Liberty and freedom exist only when responsible citizens restrain themselves. If every citizen and alien resisted the temptation to plunder every other individual, no government would be necessary. Government is necessary only to curtail those who will not live within the laws of God. It is important to note that our founders created the Constitution not only to secure the blessings of liberty for themselves but for their posterity as well. This document was designed to be an ongoing document which would guarantee liberty into the future. God has placed his stamp of approval on this idea in the following words "Again I say unto you, those who have been scattered by their enemies, it is my will that they should continue to importune for redress, and redemption, by the hands of those who are placed as rulers and are in authority over you- According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles; That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment. Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage on to another. And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood." (D&C 101:77-80)