Can't pass this one up...

Found THIS editorial today online... and I thought it rather telling in its choice of wording.

It's difficult to find a "conservative" article from mainstream sources that carries as much racial bias... and sometimes outright racist remarks... as those that come from the "Left's" most rational sources and outlets.

However, the bias of the Left is not what I wanted to talk about here... the changing of the 14th Amendment is.

Many lately have called for the repeal of the 14th Amendment, mainly from the "libertarian" branch of the conservative tree... but is that really needed?

Let's look:

I am a firm believer that the 14th Amendment was written to ensure the rights of citizenship for ALL former slaves and their offspring, and to redress the wrongs of Dred Scott v Sanford of 1856. Repeal of this amendment, I also believe, is NOT the best way to end illegal immigration into this country, nor is it a place to start that process.

Removing the ability of some illegals to utilize "anchor babies" as means to remain in this country is a good first step... but removing a portion of the Constitution is not the easiest way to get there. After all, the Constitution is primarily (according to our President) "a charter of negative liberties" which define what the government CAN'T do... and right now, leaving any portion of that charter intact so that it might better limit what the government CAN do is a good thing.

Let's look at another amendment that got repealed, and why I think that was a good thing: the 18th Amendment.

The 18th Amendment made the production, distribution, possession and consumption of any alcohol a crime in this country. This was done in the misguided attempt by the temperance movement in America to "legislate" morality to the masses, in that by making the sale and consumption of alcohol illegal, people wouldn't do it and would be better for it by not doing it. This, in my eyes, is a true "negative liberty" because the restriction is one that is carried by the PEOPLE of the US, and not by the GOVERNMENT of the US. When the 21st Amendment repealed this 18th Amendment, the balance was restored and the Constitution was once more a charter of what the government COULD or COULD NOT do... and no longer a charter of what the PEOPLE can or can't do.

The 14th Amendment is another marker that states, quite clearly, that the Government can go this far... and no further. A person, regardless of race, creed or character, is a CITIZEN by right of his or her birth in the United States... and not by the legal status of his or her parents. Moreover, it should never be the Constitution's "job" to deny illegals the means by which they can come into and stay within the US... that is a responsibility of GOVERNMENT, and it is one that is not being addressed by this (or many of the previous) Administrations to hold power here.

It is the role of the Constitution to limit Government and protect the rights of the People, and while I do feel the "original intent" of the 14th Amendment was more limited than is reflected in the wording that has lived on to now, removing or revoking even a portion of the Constitution isn't a "short term" solution option. Nothing within the 14th carries the label of limiting the PEOPLE'S RIGHTS... it defines them quite clearly, and to the advantage of the nation as a whole.

The analogy I keep thinking of is that a house can be grand and beautiful, and build on a perfect foundation of cut and mortared stone... and still be attacked by termites. To get rid of the termites, one would not dig up or replace portions of the perfect foundation stones... they would stop the termites from invading the home.

Why isn't this the easiest solution to our current problem?