Defining Patriotism

Advertisement

Editor:

I’ll be seeing my grandsons in a few weeks, so I just want to be sure I’m right when I advise them on some things in life.

The first thing I need to tell them is that you do not have to obey the law if you think it is wrong. In fact, it is actually your constitutional duty to disregard it if you want to be called a “patriot.” If necessary, you are obligated to oppose it with armed resistance.

They will need to look into obtaining their concealed weapons permit, I suppose.

Laws are subject to interpretation, of course. Just because they are upheld in courts does not mean that they are to be respected. If laws can go against your will, so can courts.

If people tell you that there is a constitutional way to change worrisome laws, you will be able to identify these people as weak tools of a group called liberals. These people are plotting to install a totalitarian world government and need to be stopped.

My grandkids are in real danger, and it is my duty as a caring grandfather to be sure they are motivated to rise up and get rid of a tyrannical United States government which attempts to impose its evil will against their Christian rights. I’ll take them to get their brown shirts.

Civil rights protesters turned the law upside down in their day without armed resistance. Of course they were perfectly willing to accept consequences until the laws were changed. I’ll urge my grandkids to refuse to accept any consequences, though. That just looks like you are giving in.

Anyway, I just want to be sure I’m correct to encourage them to find ways to oppose laws created by a corrupt federal government. Laws imposed by these bullies are only created to dominate and subjugate.

Expose the sinister intent behind governmental action, and you will be a champion like the embattled farmers who fought against military “enforcers” in the 1700s. I want my grandkids to be true patriots.

Noble Collins

Comments

Pat Randall 4 months, 1 week ago

Mr. Collins, If you have lived your life like you are going to advise your grandsons, I feel sorry for all of you. First who decides if the law is right? How about speed limits to start with? If they are driving 80 MPH in a posted 35 MPH zone and an officer stops them, do they draw their guns and shoot because they think the speed limit is wrong? Yes, there are many things wrong and need to be changed, but in my opinion you sound like a lunatic. I am very glad I didn't have grandfathers like you. I could go on with a lot of laws that need to be changed but you probably wouldn't understand why or how to go about changing them in a legal way. Yes, I believe in gun ownership, have some of my own. But I would only use them to protect my self or someone else in danger. Especially from a loose nut with a gun.

I hope your letter was supposed to be a joke. Not funny.

0

Donald Cline 4 months, 1 week ago

Cute, Noble. Silly, but cute.

Don't worry, Pat. He and I have had a running debate in private email over the Constitutional rule, established by the Supreme Court, that a law not pursuant to the delegated powers of the U.S. Constitution is but color of law, null and void, not merely from the moment of its discovery, but from the moment of its inception. And that therefore, no one may be LAWFULLY compelled to obey a federal color of law not pursuant to the Constitution. He gets all hung up on the idea that someone like the Supreme Court has to give him permission to exercise his rights, whereas it is my position that rights are a gift from God, not from the Supreme Court. He's all in a tiff over it so he writes what he thinks is a reductio ad absurdam argument to the paper that everyone is going to think is silly because they haven't heard the debate. And stated the way he is stating it, of course it is silly.

0

Mel Mevis 4 months, 1 week ago

Mr Collins makes a point and Mr Cline and Randall have reinforce his point.......both today and in the past.

Don whose God gives you those rights? Yours, mine or someone other that ours ......

Pat ridicule is a great argument.

Mr Collins I appreciate your pointing out these points using humor.

2

Donald Cline 4 months, 1 week ago

How many Gods do you believe in, Mr. Mevis? How many of them postulate the existence of natural rights under natural law? I know of only one that postulates natural rights, but I am not going to get into a theocratic debate with you if you believe your god's law is inferior to Man's Law.

Sorry, Mel, -- check that; I'm not sorry -- but ridicule is not argument; it is the weapon of the ignorant-but-indoctrinated fool, the 14-year-old juvenile, the Saul Alinsky/V.I. Lenin-trained Marxist "community organizer" and Race-Baiter, and the barbarian who thinks the customs of his tribe and island -- and political ideology -- are the Laws of Nature. (But then, I repeat myself.)

Ridicule is what Marxists and their "useful idiots" (V. I. Lenin's description of his leftist followers) use to shut down discussion and debate before their criminal conduct can be exposed to a sufficient number of people to put a stop to them. They are on every political forum open to the public on the Internet.

0

don evans 4 months ago

To me, it's obvious that Mr. Collins is just trying to bait and stoke the ire of any who believe in some if not all the precepts he has mentioned in his canard letter. If you have read any of Mr. Collins past public postings, he is far a field of what he purports in is letter above. A Liberal masked in a sheep's cloak in this case. Don't fall for it or his sycophants adulations.

0

Pat Randall 4 months ago

Sorry Mr. Mevis, I did not see any humor in any of it. I thought someone had escaped the asylum. One of my rights is my opinion.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.