A Challenge for the Advocates of the Second Amendment

Second amendment advocates, without looking, name an amendment (and its theme) besides the 1st, 2nd, or 5th. GO!

See, you don’t care about the Constitution, you just care about your guns.

About Jim

I am a Pastor, and Lecturer in Church History and Biblical Studies at Ming Hua Theological College.
This entry was posted in Modern Culture. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to A Challenge for the Advocates of the Second Amendment

  1. Rhys Schauweker says:

    Everyone should know the 14th Amendment – that’s the one the Court abused to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (’96) and rule in Obergefell v. Hodges (’15) that the Equal Protection Clause, EPC) and the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment somehow together constitute a ‘fundamental right’ to same-sex marriage. And lest we forget Roe v. Wade (’73) – the court interpreted the EPC to guarantee ‘a fundamental right’ to abortion. Doe v. Bolton in the same year used the 14th to uphold Roe v. Wade citing ‘right to privacy.’ And the Immigration Acts of 1965 and 1990 interpret the Citizenship Clause of the 14th, a Reconstruction Amendment intended to guarantee citizenship to African-Americans after the Civil War, to automatically grant U.S. citizenship to any and every person born on U.S. soil without qualification. The Constitution is fundamentally indefensible. But, I digress. The 2nd, like the rest of the document, is firmly rooted in the philosophy of English Common Law. Blackstone, in his commentaries, describes resistance to tyranny and self-preservation as a ‘natural right’ and self defense as the ‘first law of nature’. Popular support for the 2nd Amendment is not at all about defending the honor of the Constitution, or to defend the right of government to dole out ‘freedoms’ – it’s about protecting the natural right to self-defense and guarding against the unnatural impulses of government to unreasonably restrict or revoke that right. Any organization that advocates for the 2nd Amendment under the guise of a ‘militia’ sworn to uphold the Constitution is, at best, doing so cynically.


Comments are closed.