Our faith in the constitution

Two relevant things I finished today:

1. The book An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States by Charles A. Beard
2. I also finished reading all of the October 2020 General Conference talks.

I was impressed that there was an acknowledgment that the constitution had flaws in its initial framing; previous talks have been very reverential. There are reasons for that, but there were definite flaws.

Some of them required amendments.

Originally women could not vote. We clearly support women voting now, and we started that support early. It may not have been so much from a sense of injustice, but more due to it being politically advantageous based on early populations of the Saints. Unfortunately, that does not automatically mean that we acknowledge that there was something wrong with the chauvinism of the day, or that we see the chauvinism of this day.

It is important to think about how the Constitution not only enshrined slavery but did it without mentioning the word, as if that would make it less obvious how congressional representatives and the electoral college bolstered the slave states' influence by finding a way to count non-citizens as partial persons. Do we think about how that effects votes and representation now? There have been amendments and acts to fix that, but there have also been steady efforts to tear them down.

Do we think about how the Constitution never forced us to honor the treaties we made with the Indians?

Do we think about how the freedom of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment did not protect our people from being murdered and expelled from settlements, regardless of personal property abandoned and not resolved by the Second Amendment?

A large part of the weakness of the previous Articles of Confederation was an inability to assess taxes federally. The nation could ask states to levy taxes for national expenses, but they couldn't enforce it, and the states were not highly motivated to comply. 

Many of the men who participated in the Constitutional Convention had loaned money to the nation during the war, and without a strong federal government they were unlikely to be repaid. That is not completely selfless and elevated, but it is not unreasonable to pay debts either. Having the ability to tax makes many other things possible. However, it happened that most of the people participating and then voting were wealthier people from higher society. If our country did not officially have an aristocracy, there was something of a de facto one. There is nothing unusual about that, though you can argue it is not very revolutionary.

That doesn't make the Constitution bad or mean that it should be thrown out completely, but we should engage honestly and critically with it, and the values it supports and pretends to support.

Widespread LDS support for Trump has bothered me for many reasons, but the reason I brought up the White Horse prophecy - and I assume a lot of Trump supporters do believe in it - is that the way to save the Constitution is probably not the by supporting the guy who wants a third term, talks about delaying or contesting the election, and is in constant violation of the emoluments clause.

I wholly support the emoluments clause. It is a good thing to limit the ability of someone in office to exploit that office. You may not think that is happening, with some people being overly impressed that the current president is donating his salary. He is making much more than his salary based on increased business at his properties (that he should have given up) both from people wanting to get near him and from charging the Secret Service agents who have to accompany him. The information is out there. Is there also the will to study, and understand, and possibly change?

Do you believe that everyone should be able to vote? What will you do about voter suppression? Does it bother you less if the votes being suppressed tend to be from non-white voters? Because a lot of them are citizens; some people forget that. 

We are rapidly approaching the election; what will your role be?

I am still questioning how to be of the most help. However, I will note that I did spend about eight months studying and blogging about the Constitution (that was inspired by the Bundy's referencing it and not in a way that seemed to make any sense). That started here:

https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-constitution-getting-started.html

In addition, I will also be reading the Federalist and anti-Federalist papers soon, because I believe it is important. I want to understand the thoughts behind it, and if they were right or wrong. We should engage thoughtfully and critically. 

That seems like the least we can do.