Posted on

God – biggest influence on US constitution



Editor: I read with great interest the article “Looking for ‘Inalienable Rights’, God in US Constitution” in a recent edition of your newspaper. Who could make such a bold declaration, and what is the basis of their claim? As I read on, I realized that the article was just a great show of simplistic nonsense, revealing unsound and unprincipled reasoning based upon presupposition on errors.{{more}}

Firstly, the Thusian Institute for Religious Liberty (TIRL), of which I’m an Associate Director, has never once claimed that there is any expression of words on ‘inalienable rights’ or God, for that matter in the US Constitution, as suggested by Vincy Patriot. This can be proven by looking at our submissions to the Select Committee of the whole house on the SVG Constitution Bill 2009 – all found at We have always shown that the famous “We hold these truths to be self-evident..” phrase is a part of the Declaration of Independence of 1776. As a matter of fact, we have had requests from our audience for copies of this declaration. So already, this so-called Vincy patriot’s position is based on a lie against and misrepresentation of TIRL.

Further, the claims against the US Constitution reveal ignorance concerning this nation and its history. So much has American history been influenced by God, the Bible and the 10 commandments, that everywhere today in the US Capitol building in Washington DC shows the spiritual heritage of American society and legal system.

The Faith of the founding fathers has been chiseled in stone throughout the nation’s capitol and the very capitol building was used to have church services in the 1800s (Congressional records prove this). The declaration of independence became known as the generic law and foundation of the Constitution. The States knew no separation of powers under the British Monarchy, ruling over them with tyrannical strength and pomp. The Monarch was their King (Executive), Judge (Judiciary) and Law (legislature). Therefore, they were determined to guarantee a Republic in their constitution, characterized by the doctrine of separation of powers.

The 1st amendment in the US Constitution which says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or hindering the free exercise thereof…” therefore giving separation of religion and legislation (this is true separation of church and state, says Jefferson), was influenced by the value in the declaration which asserts the right to ‘liberty’

(of conscience) as one of the inalienable rights.

Finally, I refer readers to a past article published in my weekly column “Persistent Scrutiny” called “US Judges on Inalienable right to private property” in which I cited US court judges ruling on private property matters and highlighting the declaration of independence’s reference to the inalienable ‘right to the pursuit of happiness’ as the right to private property. In the case of BUTCHER’S UNION Co. V. CRESCENT CITY CO. 111 U.S. 746 (1884) the judge declared:

“It has well been said that “THE PROPERTY WHICH EVERY MAN HAS IN HIS OWN LABOUR, AS IT IS THE FOUNDATION OF ALL OTHER PROPERTY, SO IT IS THE MOST SACRED AND INVIOLABLE. The Patrimony of the poor man lies in his strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property. It is a manifest encroachment upon the just liberty both of the workman and of those who might be disposed to employ him…the right to follow any of the common occupations of life is an inalienable right, it was formulated as such under the phrase ‘pursuit of happiness’ in the declaration of independence, which commenced with the fundamental proposition that ‘all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”

Vincy Patriot needs a lesson in American History and a reformed heart after the pure faith (doctrine) of Jesus Christ is necessary to cleanse his ideas. For if such is the mental content of a patriot, then woe be unto us in this Country with such seeds of future tyranny planted in hearts. This Constitution document before us does not

begin to compare with the US Constitution which still today in law courses is touted as the only system of governance which truly embraces separation of powers.

Vincy patriot ends by praising the proposed new Constitution but argues against the explicit mention of ‘Inalienable rights’ in it, even though those two words have been added. What a contradiction! It just goes to show how the words ‘inalienable rights’ mean nothing after all to who I suspect is the same pseudo writer who wrote a piece on “Ralph Haters…” the

other day – now possibly writing under “Vincy patriot”. True patriotism/love for Country will wish to embrace God in every sense in Constitution reform, since without him we cannot exist, we cannot have rights and we cannot speak of governance and the need to protect rights.

Let us not sell our safety in God to enemies of our state in patriot’s clothing. Down with Communism which abolishes religion!

Long live a God-endowed, inalienable rights foundation for our Constitution!

Anesia Baptiste