Mike Church Explains Why Incorporating the Bill of Rights is a Bad Idea

From Mike Church:

 Without any doubt, without any equivocation, 100 percent incorrect.  By the way, nobody called the first ten amendments the Bill of Rights until incorporation was invented in the early part of the 20th century.  Amendment One is part of a suite of twelve amendments that were proposed in the first congress and sent to the states for ratification.  The sole and explicit purpose of those amendments were that the states that ratified begrudgingly -- like New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia especially, North Carolina, which would not ratify until amendments had been proposed and adopted -- the sole, explicit purpose of those first ten amendments that were ratified were to ensure that the new general government would not abuse its powers.  They were not directed at the states.  If they were directed at the states, then the states already had the political power to do everything in those amendments.  It wouldn’t have made any sense for those amendments to be directed at the states, seeing as how the states created the federal government.  If you read the preamble to the first ten amendments, it’s clear, in order to secure more safeguards against abuse, and I’m paraphrasing, against the abuse of the new general government these amendments are sent to the states for ratification.  The First Amendment was not a guarantee of free speech from here all the way to the star gate, or from Philadelphia all the way to Anchorage, Alaska, or for a nation, or for the states that would operate under and trade a little bit of their sovereignty to what we call today the United States.  It was solely and explicitly to stop Congress, to stop and forbid the new Congress from doing it.


This is why you have to read.  If you’re confused about this, number one, get a copy of the Bill of Rights and read the preamble, the statement that was sent to the states when it was ratified.  It’ll explain the whole thing to you, that the first ten amendments were to secure further safeguards from abuse of the general government.  Then, when the Alien and Sedition Acts are passed in 1798, the gut reaction, the visceral reaction of the Virginians and the Kentuckians, namely Madison, Jefferson, Taylor of Caroline and many of the men of Virginia, was that we specifically have a First Amendment to stop the sedition part of the Alien and Sedition Acts.  If you read the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, written by a pair of men wiser than you and I, that would be Mr. Madison and Mr. Jefferson, they fully explain that Congress has no authority whatsoever over censoring anyone’s speech, and that’s explicit in the First Amendment.  So no, it’s not a grant that you can do and say whatever you want to and you have redress and can take it to the Supreme Court.  If Congress or an agency funded by Congress does censor your speech, then the First Amendment applies, and only then.

Read more... and be sure to catch Mike Church on SiriusXM Patriot.