Last week Luma Simms posted an excellent article at The Federalist — here was the subtitle:
If most Americans are no longer constrained by religion or morality, do we have any hope of securing lasting civil and religious liberties?
Good question. Here is an excerpt:
If any minority seeks not to protect its liberty, but to subvert the moral conscience of the majority, does our majority have the conscience and morality to stand?
When the majority has already been steeped in the anti-moral doctrine that, effectively, “all ideas are equal,” the answer to these questions is clearly, “no.” Even if the most competent constitutional lawyers were to run around the country stamping out legal fires like the one in Houston several months back or Indiana recently, or the Supreme Court case just argued; if most people living in these United States no longer hold nor can agree on matters of religion or morality, how long before our Constitution, or “government of law,” collapses?
If most people living in these United States no longer agree on matters of religion or morality, how long before our ‘government of law’ collapses?
Asking this question sheds even more light on this idea of being a people governed by law rather than men: The logical conclusion of a collapsing moral and religious majority automatically collapses the laws of our nation. This is so because those guarding those laws requires men and women willing to uphold them. When the religion and morality intrinsically required to be “guardians and ministers” of our government of laws does not exist within the individual (or is enfeebled), we collapse into a nation governed by the whims of man.
Read more: The Federalist
Image credit: blogs.e-rockford.com.
