ON ITS surface, the question posited above could for some, to be a daunting one. However, given the underlying tone I feel it relatively important to respond as succinctly and directly as possible.
I have to believe that anyone who seeks the knowledge of another must in his/her own mind have an opinion and since I am quite willing to share my point of view, I feel it incumbent upon the inquirer to share in kind. It is my hope, as I follow-up that this would indeed be the case.
Marcus Tullius Cicero (c. 106-43 B.C.) was the great defender of the Roman republic and a master of oratory. The author of several books on politics, philosophy, and rhetoric, he was the first to speak of natural law as a moral or political law, and was an important influence on our great nation's Founders.
Around 54-51 B.C. he wrote: "true law is right reason, consonant with nature, spread through all people. It is consonant and eternal; it summons to duty by its orders, it deters from crime by its prohibitions. Its orders and prohibitions to good people are never given in vain; but it does not move the wicked by these orders or prohibitions. It is wrong to pass laws obviating this law; it is not permitted to abrogate any of it; it cannot be totally repealed. We cannot be released from this law by the senate or the people, and it needs no exegete or interpreter like Sextus Aelius. There will not be one law at Rome and another at Athens, one now and another later; but all nations at all times will be bound by this one eternal and unchangeable law, and God will be one common Master and General (so to speak) of all people. He is the Author, Expounder and Mover of this law; and the person who does not obey Him will be in exile from himself. Insofar as he scorns his nature as a human being, by this very fact he will pay the greatest penalty, even if he escapes all the other things that are generally recognized as punishments...." (Ref. "On the Commonwealth," in James E.G. Zetel, ed., Cambridge University Press, 1999; 71-72).
So fifty-five delegates from twelve states (Rhode Island declined to participate) traveled to Philadelphia to attend the Constitutional Convention, which began in May 1787. They quickly scrapped the existing Articles of Confederation, and after four long months they concluded their business by adopting a new frame of government. On September 17th, 39 delegates signed what we hold today, the Constitution of the United States of America. It was nine months before the requisite nine-states ratified this Constitution, putting it into effect. The 13th state ratified it in 1790, and subsequently it has been ratified twenty-seven times.
At this point, I would note that pastors and ministers were among the highest educated citizens in the American colonies, and often addressed politics from the pulpit. As a source of reference for my perspective here, I should like to write excerpts from Gad Hitchcock (1718-1803), which was delivered in the presence of General Thomas Gage, the British military governor of the Province of Massachusetts Bay. Basically it decries monarchical rule and celebrates the idea of the consent of the governed, appealing to reason as well as revelation: "....This form of government, in the opinion of subjects and strangers, is happily calculated for the preservation of the Bill of Rights and Liberties of mankind..." "In such a government, rulers have their distinct powers assigned to them by the PEOPLE, who are the ONLY SOURCE of civil authority on earth, with the view of having them exercised for the public advantage, and in proportion as worthy end of their investiture is kept in sight, and prosecuted, the bands of society are strengthened, and its interests promoted...." It goes on to say, "Rulers are under the most sacred ties to consult the good of society....." "For the promotion of this valuable end, they are ORDAINED OF GOD, and clothed with authority by men..."
So in an ideal society, (to my belief), in a state of nature men are equal, exactly on a par in regard to authority; each one is a law to himself, having the law of God, the sole rule of conduct, written on each man's heart. So I further believe that mental endowments, though excellent qualifications for rulers, should use those attributes in the advice, persuasion and to do good proportionate to the degrees of each, yet do not give any antecedent right to the exercise of authority without a moral obligation from the Supreme Author and Finisher.
So in contemplating your question, I could go much deeper into what to me would be far from utopian, but at least ideal in the sense that we must be governed and the rule of law exercised, by stating unequivocally, that America needs only to return to the Founding Father's ideals for a Christian nation and once again, take up the values and principles of the Constitution as set forth under the guidance and grace of Almighty God.
Today, I believe that Christ is standing outside of Washington D.C. knocking. His knocking is good news. We know that Christ is all powerful and can walk through any door so why does He not just enter into the hearts of every man?
The answer is in the Word of God...Fellowship cannot be forced. Communion cannot be commanded. Christ cannot have fellowship with us by breaking down the door. He seeks a deeper fellowship with us than we do with Him.
Let's put God back in the hearts and minds of Congress, the legislature, the Supreme Court, the state Capitals, and the city councils and schools. God Bess America (again)!

I want age limits on the SUPREMES. I want reasonable and specific ways to remove activist judges who issue rulings not limited to facts presented in the case, totally without political or other personal views, based only on the constitution. I want a Congress composed of honest , patriotic people with commonsense with limited terms. I want election financiers changed so thst it is possible for ordinary citizens to run for office. I want a government that NEVER, EVER, puts ANYTHING above the best interests of America and its citizens. I want all USA citizens rights and benefits limited to USA citizens. I want Congress changed so that every bill/proposal is a stand-alone, and voted on thst way; no more attaching one bill to another when they have no relevance to each other. I want all bills published to the public at least 60 days before any voting. I want all voting records published to the public immediately after every vote on any bill. I want many of the perks of Congress cut out. I want Congress working at least an 8 hour day M-F, 48 weeks annually. I want SS/Medicare removed from access by Congress and remove their ability to vote themselves pay raises or any other increase in perks. I want the department of education disbanded and returned to the states. Because so many members of Congress are totally incompetent in their jobs but get reelected over and over, I want to hear lots of discussion and study about returning to the original plan of each state's legislature selecting federal representatives for limited times. I want the whole lobbying mess made illegal. I want state government limited to things individuals cannot easily do for themselves. I want federal government limited to only things affecting the protection of the whole country, things states can not easily do for themselves. I want the federal welfare system phased out, letting each state/community take care of its own. I want the entire deportation mess changed, enforcing immediate deportation within 60 days of arrest, no lawyers/judges/court hearings except in few very special cases. Being in our country illegally is easily determined and should be quickly solved by deportation, the only logical solution to the crime. I want the birthright citizenship ENDED now, with the requirement of one citizen parent required. I want the refugee/asylee program revamped completely with the allowed reasons limited to an individual being extremely persecuted for religion or political views, ENDING their country being at war as a reason. I want the bringing foreigners INTO our nation as an aspect of "helping" ENDED; send help to them but DO NOT bring them here and this includes reasons of war/fighting as well as natural disasters as well as poverty, etc. I want every federal government agency's duties/responsibilities specifically spelled out and the same for each employee. I want the number of employees in every agency cut in half and all salaries and perks commiserate with those of workers in the private sector. Heads of agencies salary should never exceed that of Congress members. I can go on, but will stop here.

While I cannot imagine how anyone would not see the relationship between the two, I will help you out.

The presence of any religious symbols, quotations and doctrines in any courthouse lends preferential authority to those symbols. It makes an association of the law and specific religions that anyone with any sense of understanding can see is prohibited by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

If the 10 Commandments can be there, then why not quotations from The Qur'an, or a statue of Buddha or Shiva?

It would perhaps be more appropriate to place a statue of Hammurabi, whose code was among the first to establish the presumption of innocence of the accused. But I do not see anyone clamoring for that.

You folks all have debated what you each think has happened in the past and it is interesting.

But...We have the big question still un-answered....WHAT ARE WE CAPABLE OF DOING ABOUT IT?????

. HOW CAN WE FORCE THE Hoodlums to give up their power and obey the Constitution?
They won’t do it voluntarily.

How can we citizens force the people who have taken over our government to obey any law.
We have no way to get rid of them. (And don’t tell me we can VOTE ‘EM OUT. That has no power. You need to be able to Force the will of the people. If you can’t understand that, you might as well give up before you start, cause they can sure force you to obey....at their gun point.)

We have no weapons to use to enforce the Govt. hoods to obey the Constitution.
They, the Govt. hoodlums have armies of legitimate troops as well as “contractors”, armed with the most modern weapons to force us to obey their wishes.
We are essentially kept dumb, confused, sickly and divided.

A revolution today is unthinkable.

So now what?

This is another of those manufactered quotes we see so much of on the deinier sites..

Read the carefully and think about the points made.


https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/11/07/how-climate-science-deniers-manufacture-quotes-convince-you-united-nations-one-big-socialist-plot


EELI, which backs President Trump’s attempts to withdraw from the deal, wrote that Edenhofer had “affirmed” the Paris agreement, saying in a press release:

Ottmar Edenhofer, a recent co-chair of the U.N.s IPCC Working Group III, affirmed the scheme: “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy…We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy.”

If you search for the phrase “we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” you’ll find it repeated over and over on climate science denial blogs and sympathetic conservative media outlets. The link given by EELI goes to a page that also claims Edenhofer had “spilled the movement's dirty secret.”

So where did the quote come from, did Edenhofer say it, and was he really admitting a sinister plan to redistribute the world’s wealth?

The quote originates from this 2010 interview, written in German. Have you spotted the first problem?

How could Edenhofer have “affirmed the scheme” from the Paris accord, when the Paris deal didn’t even exist in 2010 (it was only signed in 2015)? It’s OK. You don’t need to answer. By the way, EELI's Christopher Horner wasn't so keen to answer questions about his coal funding in Paris.

All the outlets using the Edenhofer quote have relied on Google Translate to tell them what Edenhofer might have said, as the original interview was in German.

A spokesperson for Edenhofer told me the quote was used “to imply that Prof. Edenhofer ‘admits’ that there is some kind of ‘hidden agenda’ behind climate policy.“

The spokesperson added: “Of course, this is not what he was saying. These quotes are taken out of context to be misused. The devaluation of fossil fuel reserves of course leads in a way to wealth redistribution — but this is rather a consequence of the necessity to stop using fossil fuels, and not the actual goal of climate policy.”

'Isn’t the only hope for this planet that the industrialized civilization collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?'

Without knowing it, I guess I was kidding you. Never had a lap top before. It's an HP Chrome with Intel and I have tried a few different things but nothing seems to support cut and paste. Is that a Window's only tool? Forgive my knowledge about this stuff, they didn't have computer classes when I went to school. Most of my use of computers was limited by my job's requirements and it's scope and I only used my old home computer for news and e-mails. After 15 years, it has seen it's last byte and trip to the geek repair/upgrade shops.