Is The Constitution Pornography?

Progressives are getting desperate. They cannot deal with the absolutes of the Constitution, so they first resort to criticizing it. Barack Obama did this in 2001, saying the Constitution was fundamentally flawed because of its restraints on government.


After the 112th Congress opened its session with a historical reading of the Constitution on the House floor in January 2011, this really set the progressives over the edge. First, Marxist propagandist and former Howard Dean campaigner Ezra Klein claimed that the Constitution was irrelevant and has no binding power!


(Does the First Amendment have any binding power on Klein’s right to write and speak lunacy?)

The third step was for several liberal legislators and the lamestream media accusing republicans and TEA partiers of having a “constitution fetish“.  The word “fetish” has a couple of definitions.

1. An object regarded with awe as being the embodiment or habitation of a potent spirit or as having magical potency.

2. Any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation.

While the technical context of the criticism was the first, the obvious connotation was the second. Much like the tea partiers were labeled as “teabaggers” by the progressives (a repulsive act of homosexuals), now the Constitution itself has been derided and sexualized as pornography – an addictive vice that is worshiped, idolized, and causes arousal.

At the same time, progressives will defend real pornography as a sacred right protected by the very document they lampoon!

This is what happens when absolutes are thrown out the window – reality is subjective to the whims of those in power. The Constitution, much like the Bible, is chock-full of didactic and absolute language – “shall” and “shall not” – referring to the powers and limitations of the federal government. However, progressives and tyrants prefer feel-good dialectic and flexible language that appeals to our flesh and humanistic sinful nature. This how government health care becomes a “right”, homosexuals are allowed to serve in the military, and illegal immigrants become righteous victims deserving of mercy instead of law-breakers.

If anybody has a fetish, it is the progressives with their obsession of “salvation by the state”.  So-called democracy is their church, the media is the choir, and the IRS passes the collection plates (at the point of a gun). Some even get a thrill up their leg at the mere thought of a savior-President. Who has the fetish now?


With this crowd, every problem has a big-government solution, and anyone who dares to appeal to a higher authority to argue otherwise is dismissed with sophomoric insults. Yet the book of Ecclesiastes tells us that what is crooked cannot be made straight. (Eccl. 1:15). This fallen and sinful world cannot be “fixed” by the power of the state. The founders of America knew this, and crafted our brilliant Constitution because they understood human nature.

It’s not about fetishes, it’s about world view. It’s not about worshiping or deifying the Constitution, it’s about respect for absolutes and God’s authority over His creation. The only question is, are there enough Americans remaining that have a Biblical and Constitutional world view of absolutes to preserve this nation for future generations? Or will we allow those with big-government fetishes to trash our Constitution and turn us into a European-style secular and socialist state?

Aware of the tendency of power to degenerate into abuse, the
worthies of our country have secured its independence by the
establishment of a Constitution and form of government for our
nation, calculated to prevent as well as to correct abuse.
Thomas Jefferson

Reprinted by permission of Liberty Nation