NLA REVIEW	AMERICA'S CHOICE: PART 11 A SACRED TRUST THE PROTECTION OF UNALIENABLE RIGHTS by Robert C. Cannada	Spring 1997

he Declaration of Independence (hereinafter referred to as the "Declaration") established the United States of America as a nation—an independent nation separate from the government of Great Britain. In that connection, the Declaration stated as follows:

WE, THEREFORE, the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.-And for the Support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

But this is not all that was accomplished by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration. At the very beginning of the Declaration it was stated that, since the States were severing their political bands with Great Britain and forming an independent nation, the world should be told why this was being done. They set forth in the following language:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Thus, our Founding Fathers, in the Declaration, acknowledged the existence of the Laws of Nature and the Laws of Nature's God and the applicability of those "laws" to the new nation. They also concluded that "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind" required that they should declare the "causes" which led to the separation from Great Britain.

The way and manner in which our Founding Fathers set forth those "causes" is most interesting. First, they set forth some "truths" which they classified as being "self-evident." This was done by the following language:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these am Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Our Founding Fathers then, in the Declaration, set forth why "Governments are instituted among men." They expressed this in the following language:

That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Thus, the "purpose" of any government, according to the Declaration, is to "secure" the "unalienable Rights" with which " all men" are endowed by their Creator.

Our Founding Fathers then, in the Declaration, set forth what should happen if a government failed to "secure" the unalienable rights of the individual. They did this by the following language:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Thus the failure of the government to protect these "unalienable rights" is sufficient cause for the People to alter or to abolish the Form of Government and to institute a new Form of Government. In accordance with that concept the Declaration provided, with reference to the American people:

[i]t is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Thus, having established the "cause" for the throwing off of a government which fails to secure the unalienable rights of the people, our Founding Fathers then set about to organize the powers of the new government in such a way as to, in their judgment, best "secure" these unalienable rights. At the present time this effort is represented by the Constitution of 1787, as amended.

It is clear from the language of the Declaration that the Form of Government of any government should consist of these two parts, (1) a foundation of principles (i.e., the source or basis of unalienable rights) and (2) the organization of its powers.

Since the Constitution is designed to organize the powers of the government, it makes no mention of "unalienable Rights" nor does it make any mention of the transcendent truths or principles from which those unalienable rights descend, rest or depend. Neither does the Constitution refer to "Nature's God," to the "Laws of Nature's God" or to the Creator. Apart from the Declaration there is simply no basis in the Organic Laws of our Nation for officeholders to acknowledge that there are such things as "unalienable Rights."

In its mission statement, the National Lawyers Association has acknowledged that the officeholders in the government of America are, under their oath or affirmation, obligated to interpret the Constitution in the light of the principles set forth in the Declaration. The legal basis and reasoning for this conclusion by the National Lawyers Association was set forth in an article published in the 1996 Winter issue of the NLA Review, which article has also been published in the Spring 1997 CEBA Journal. In effect, the mission statement of the National Lawyers Association act knowledges that the officeholders in the government of America have an obligation in the nature of a Sacred Trust to protect and secure the unalienable rights of the People.

There is, of course, a legal connection or relationship between the Charter and the bylaws of a corporation. Accordingly, the officers and directors of a corporation must conduct the affairs of the corporation by looking not only to the bylaws (i.e., the operating rules and regulations for the corporation), but also to its charter which contains its purpose and the reason for its existence. As was pointed out in the aforementioned article, the Declaration contains the purpose and the reasons for the existence of the government of America and the Constitution contains its operating rules and regulations. Accordingly, just as is hue of a corporation, the officeholders of the government of America must conduct the business of this government by looking not only to the Constitution (i.e., the operating rules and regulations for the government), but also to the Declaration which created the nation and set forth the purpose of the government of the nation together with the powers of and limitations on that government.

The acknowledgment and honoring of this connection or relationship by the officeholders of the government means that America has a government with limited powers and that the officeholders have a responsibility to "secure" the "unalienable Rights" of each individual. The failure of the officeholders to acknowledge and honor this connection or relationship means that America has a government with totalitarian powers composed of officeholders who owe no duty to protect or secure the unalienable rights of the people or to acknowledge and honor any of the unalienable rights set forth in the Declaration or any of the transcendent truths acknowledged therein, leading to disastrous results.

Do the citizens of this nation desire and expect our government to protect their individual rights-their individual liberties? Anyone reading this article should think this statement through very carefully before reading any further. Is this really what you desire of and expect from your government? This was certainly the intent of the Founding Fathers of our government. Their baffle cry was individual "liberty" from an oppressive government -a government that did not honor the "Laws of Nature's God."

If humans are possessed with unalienable individual "rights"-individual "liberty" -then the government must acknowledge and honor those " unalienable Rights." This constitutes a limitation upon the "power" or the "authority" of the government. It is just that simple. If the people in America are possessed with individual unalienable "rights" which are to be acknowledged and honored by the government, then the government does not have the "power" or the "authority" to destroy those "rights." Its power is limited in that regard. In fact, the government is obligated to protect or "secure" those individual unalienable "rights."

The question is then raised as to whether our Founding Fathers intended for the governmental form which they established to acknowledge and honor individual unalienable "rights" or whether they intended to establish a governmental form with totalitarian powers in the government. With this question in mind, we look at the documents prepared and approved by our Founding Fathers which (1) established our nation and set forth the foundation for its government, and (2) organized the powers of this government.

In Article VI of the Constitution our Founding Fathers provided as follows:

All potential officeholders, therefore, before they can assume the power and authority of the office, must take an oath or give an affirmation "to support this Constitution."

If there is no legal connection or relationship between the "Constitution" and the Declaration, then the officeholders have only the Constitution to look to for their guidance and instruction. Since the Constitution contains no provisions referring to unalienable rights or to the source of those unalienable rights, or transcendent, unchangeable and unchanging principles, there is simply no limitation on the powers of the constitutionally oriented government. Thus, if the officeholders are obligated to look only to the Constitution as a freestanding document in the performance of their official duties and ignore the Constitution connection with or relationship to the Declaration, then America has a government with totalitarian powers which has no obligation whatsoever to even acknowledge, much less "secure," that Americans are endowed with unalienable rights, including the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

On the other hand, if there is a legal connection or relationship between the Declaration and the Constitution, then all officeholders are obligated, under their oath or affirmation, to interpret the Constitution in accordance with that legal connection or relationship. Since the Declaration refers to "self-evident" truths (transcendent truths or principles) and "unalienable Rights" the Constitution is to be interpreted in the light of the existence of those self-evident truths and "unalienable Rights."

The answer as to the identity of those "self evident" truths and " unalienable Rights," the existence of which all officeholders are to acknowledge and honor, is found, in part, in the wording of the Declaration. The Declaration does not identify any of the "Laws of Nature's God" and the only "unalienable Rights" of each individual that are listed are the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The Declaration clearly, however, acknowledged the existence of "Nature's God" and of the "Laws of Nature's God" and sets forth principles and truths which are classified as being self-evident. Just as a charter sets forth the purposes of and the limitations on the powers of a corporation, the Declaration sets forth the purposes of and limitations on the powers of the government of America. Just as the charter of a corporation leaves it up to another document, the bylaws, to specify how the corporation is to function, the Declaration leaves it up to another document, the Constitution, to specify how the government is to function-the rules and procedures that are to be followed as the government enacts statutes and makes decisions that are needed to protect or "secure" the unalienable rights with which "all men" have been endowed by their Creator.

Thus, the answer to the question as to what is required of officeholders is that they are obligated and committed to perform their official duties in accordance with the legal connection or relationship between the Constitution and the Declaration. The officeholders are to look to both the Constitution and the Declaration for instruction and guidance in the performance of their official duties.

If our officeholders understand and follow this concept, that is, as they perform their official duties they acknowledge and honor the fact that there is a legal connection or relationship between the Declaration and the Constitution, then they will acknowledge the existence of, and that they are not authorized or empowered to enact legislation or make decisions contrary to, the "Laws of Nature's God" or to those "truths that are self-evident" as set forth in the Declaration. Our officeholders will be free to recognize the existence of "absolutes": that some things are "right" and that some things are "wrong"; i.e., that there are recognized standards for moral behavior. This will result, as governmental policies are established, in constructive arguments and debates in the legislative halls of the government as well as within the judiciary. These arguments and debates will acknowledge and honor the existence of the transcendent truths and principles as set forth in the Declaration which is essential if we are to reestablish the moral principles on which our country was founded and individual unalienable rights are protected. And yet, this concept is not based upon any particular religion.

As can be seen from the language of the two documents, the Declaration and the Constitution, not only did the Founding Fathers intend to prohibit the intermingling of a particular organized religion into the fabric of the government, but they also expected all officeholders to acknowledge the existence of transcendent moral laws and the divine lawgiver who gave those laws. In fact, it is submitted that no person who denies the existence of transcendent moral laws is capable of properly "supporting the Constitution" in view of the legal connection or relationship between the Declaration and the Constitution. If there are no such things as transcendent moral laws, then there are no such things as individual unalienable rights.

The "Laws of Nature's God" and the "truths that are self-evident," as set forth in the Declaration, contain principles and concepts designed for human beings and have been written on the hearts of all humans by their Creator. These "moral laws" may have been adopted by many, if not most, "religions" but these "moral laws" pre-date any "religion." These "moral laws" have been in existence since the creation of mankind.

The powers and authority of our government are specifically limited by the transcendent truths and principles as set forth in the Declaration. The People, had the power and authority to place this limitation on the government and they did so.

The requirement that all officeholders, in the performance of their official duties, acknowledge and honor the existence of the self-evident truths and principles as set forth in the Declaration does not conflict with Article VI of or the First Amendment to the Constitution.

All citizens, whether adherents of a particular religion or not adherents of any particular religion, should welcome efforts to convince our officeholders that they are obligated under their oath or affirmation to perform their official duties in accord with the Constitution interpreted in the light of the principles set forth in the Declaration.

Unless "the People" are successful in this effort America will have a government with unlimited powers and individual "unalienable Rights," including Freedom of Religion, will be in serious jeopardy.

Americans are entitled to officeholders who acknowledge and honor the fact that they are a part of a government with limited powers and that the protection and securing of the "unalienable Rights" of "the People" by the government is, in effect, a Sacred Trust.