WELCOME!  

Listed below are 25 questions and answers dealing with government and 
the role of government.  These were the first 25 questions taken from 
book "What the Constitution REALLY Means" by Larry Wilcox.

I hope you will take the time and really read and ponder the questions
and answers.  After you have read, pondered and prayed about these 
question and answers, please put the new knowledge to work and get 
involved!

Enjoy!

1.  QUESTION:  Which was created on this earth first, people or
government?
      ANSWER:  It should be obvious to everyone that individuals had 
to be created before governments could be formed.

2.  QUESTION:   Was there any need for a government with only one
person on the earth?
      ANSWER:   Since only one person existed, he could not employ
anyone else to help him protect his interests.  Therefore, no government
was possible.

3.  QUESTION:   Was it possible to have a government with only two
people on the earth?
    ANSWER:   It should be obvious that each could cancel the other's
vote so no government was possible.  If both agreed, there was no need
for any government.

4.  QUESTION:  How many people were necessary in order to form a
government?
    ANSWER:   At least three people would be necessary so one could 
hire the second to protect himself from the third.

5.  QUESTION:   From whom do individuals receive their rights?
    ANSWER:  Man's rights are a gift from God, our Creator.  By the 
time the Declaration of Independence was penned by Thomas Jefferson 
and signed by the delegates to the Continental Congress, this concept
was so ingrained in the founders of our country that they signed the 
following: "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,"
 
6.  QUESTION:  What are the three principal rights which are given to
individuals by God?
    ANSWER:   The right to life, the right to ownership and control
of property and the right to liberty are indispensable if the individual
is to exercise free agency.  
    Former United States Supreme Court Justice, George Sutherland of 
Utah in a speech before the New York Bar Association on Jan. 21, 1921,
stated: "It is not the right of property which is protected, but the 
right TO property.  Property, per se, had no rights; but the individual
- the man- has three great rights, equally sacred from arbitrary
interference; the RIGHT TO HIS LIFE, THE RIGHT TO HIS LIBERTY, AND THE 
RIGHT TO HIS PROPERTY.  The three rights are so bound together as to 
be essentially ONE right.  To give a man his life, but deny him his 
liberty, is to take from him all that makes life worth living.  To give 
him liberty but take from him the property which is the fruit and badge
of his liberty, is to still leave him a slave." (Quoted by President 
David O. McKay,  CR 10/62 p.6)

7.  QUESTION:  Who can deprive an individual of his right to life, 
liberty, or property?
    ANSWER:  Since these rights are a gift from God, it follows that
only He can revoke the gift.  However, a man may give up his life or 
his liberty or his property voluntarily. 
    Moreover,  he may forfeit his life, liberty or property as the 
result of disobedience to the laws of God or the laws of man which are
based on the laws of God.
    On the other hand, any attempt by our servants in government to take
an individual's, liberty or property beyond that necessary under the 
United States Constitution as it was originally conceived, violates 
the contract between the people who created the government and those 
serving in the government.
			
8.  QUESTION:   What other right is necessary in order to uphold the
rights of the individual to his life, liberty, and ownership and 
control of his property?
    ANSWER:  God has given every individual the right to use defensive 
force to protect his life, liberty and property.  Without the right of
self-defense the rights to life, liberty and property are non-existent.
    Writing about Moroni who was chief Captain of the Nephite armed 
forces in B.C. 72, Mormon has the following to say:
    "And Moroni was a strong and mighty man;  he was a man of a
    perfect understanding; yea, a man that did not delight in 
    bloodshed; a man whose soul did joy in the liberty and the 
    freedom of his country, and his brethren from bondage and 
    slavery.
    "Yea, a man whose heart did swell with thanksviving to his 
    God, for the many privileges and blessings which he bestowed 
    upon his people; a man who did labor exceedingly for the 
    welfare and safety of his people.
    "Yea, he was man who was firm in the faith of Christ, and he 
    had sworn with an oath to defend his people, his rights, and 
    his country, and his religion, even to the loss of his blood.
    "Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against 
    their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were 
    necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an
    offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were 
    against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives.
    "Yea, verily, verily I say unto you, if all men had been, 
    and were, and ever would be, like unto Moroni, behold, the 
    very powers of hell would have been shaken forever; yea, 
    the devil would never have power over the hearts of the 
    children of men.
    "Behold, he was a man like unto Ammon, the son of Mosiah, 
    yea, and even the other sons of  Mosiah, yea, and also Alma
    and his sons, for they were all men of God."(Alma 48:11-14,17,18)

    Samuel Adams in his essay, "Rights of the Colonists," wrote the 
following in 1772:  "Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these; 
First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; 
together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner 
they can.  These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, 
the duty of a self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature. 
All men have a right to remain in a state of nature as long as they 
please; and in case of intolerable oppression, civil or religious, to 
leave the society they belong to, and enter into another. When men 
enter into society, it is by voluntary consent; and they have a right 
to demand and insist upon the performance of such conditions and 
previous limitations as form an equitable original compact."
(THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, quoted on 
page 365)

9.  QUESTION:  Does any individual or group have the right to use
aggressive force against any other individual or group?
    ANSWER:  Nowhere in the laws of God is the individual given any 
right to commit an act of aggression against anyone.  In fact, after a 
thousand years in which the Nephites had defended themselves against the 
aggressive acts of their enemies, the Lamanites, they made the fatal 
mistake of swearing to attack the Lamanites.
    Mormon records the event as follows:  "And they did swear
     by the heavens, and also by the throne of God, that they
     would go up to battle against their enemies, and would cut 
     them off from the face of the land.
     "And it came to pass that I, Mormon, did utterly refuse from
     this time forth to be a commander and a leader of this people, 
     because of their wickedness and abomination.
     "Behold, I had led them, notwithstanding their wickedness I 
     had led them many times to battle, and had loved them, 
     according to the love of God which was in me, with all my 
     heart; and my soul had been poured out in prayer unto my God
     all the day long for them; nevertheless, it was without 
     faith, because of the hardness of their hearts.
     "And thrice have I delivered them out of the hands of their 
     enemies, and they have repented not of their sin.
     "And when they sworn by all that had been forbidden them by
     our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, that they would go up 
     unto their enemies to battle, and avenge themselves of the
     blood of their brethren, behold the voice of the Lord came 
     unto me saying:
	"Vengeance is mine, and I will repay; and because
        this people repented not after I had delivered them, 
        behold, they shall be cut off from the face of the  
        earth."  (Mormon 3: 10-15)
   Because it bears repeating, Mormon also said,
     "Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against 
     their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were 
     necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an 
     offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were 
     against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives."
     (Alma 48:14)

10.  QUESTION:   Who had the right to use defensive force in order to
preserve his life, liberty and property?
     ANSWER:   Every individual has the right to use defensive force 
to protect himself from those who use aggressive force.  Freedom would 
be impossible without the right to protect life, liberty and property 
from those who would take them by force.
     In Chapter 14 of Genesis we find the account of Abram acting upon 
this principle to rescue his nephew, Lot.
        "And when Abram heard that Lot, his brother's son, was 
        taken captive, he armed his trained men, and they which
        were born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen,
 	and pursued unto Dan.
        "And he divided himself against them, he and his men, 
        by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah,
        which was on the left hand of Damascus.
	"And he brought back Lot, his brother's son, and all
        his goods, and the women also, and the people. . . .
        "And Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought forth bread 
        and wine; and he break bread and blest it; and he blest 
        the wine; he being the priest of the most high God.
        "And he gave to Abram, and he blessed him, and said, 
        Blessed Abram, thou are a man of the most high God,
        possessor of heaven and earth;
	"And blessed is the name of the most high God, which 
        hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand." 
        (Genesis 14:13-15, 17-19, Inspired Version)

     Describing this type of situation, Samuel Adams had the following
to say:   "In a	state of nature men may, as the patriarchs did, employ 
hired servants for the defense of their lives, liberties, and property; 
and they should pay them reasonable wages. 
     Government was instituted for the purpose of common defense, and 
those who hold the reins of government have an equitable, natural right 
to an honorable support from the same principle which that 'the laborer 
is worthy of his hire.'  But then the same community which they serve 
ought to be the assessors of their pay.  Governors have no right to seek 
and take what they please: by this, instead of being content with the 
station assigned them, that of honorable servants of the society, they 
would soon become absolute masters, despots, and tyrants.  Hence, as a 
private man has a right to say what wages he will give in his private 
affairs, so has a community to determine what they will	give and grant 
of their substance for the administration of public affairs.  And, in 
both cases, more are ready to offer their service at the proposed and 
stipulated price than are able and willing to perform their duty."  
(THE CHRISTIAN  HISTORY OF THE 	UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, quoted on 
pages 366-367)

11.  QUESTION:   Since each individual has the right to use defensive
force, could he delegate authority to another person or group of persons
to act in his behalf?
     ANSWER:   Delegation of authority is a time honored principle
which is usually used to free the one holding authority to work on more
important matters.  Those to whom authority is delegated are servants 
or employees of the one doing the delegating and the authority which 
they exercise under the leader's direction in no way diminishes the 
leader's own authority.  Each individual receives his rights or authority 
from God.  He, alone, can delegate authority to his servants who make 
up the government.
     Samuel Adams wrote as follows:  "In the state of nature every man 
is, under God, judge and sole judge of his own rights and of the injuries 
done him.  By entering into society he agrees to an arbiter or indifferent 
judge between him and his neighbor; but he no more renounces his original 
right than by taking a cause out of the ordinary course of law, and 
leaving the decision to referees or indifferent arbitrators.  In the 
last case, he must pay the referees for time and trouble.  He should 
also be willing to pay his just quota for the support of government, 
the law, and the constitution; the end of which is to furnish indifferent 
and impartial judges." (THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES 
CONSTITUTION,  quoted on page 366)

12.  QUESTION:   Can an individual delegate to another individual or
group of individuals the authority to break a law of God?
     ANSWER:   The answer to this question should be obvious and the 
correct answer is NO!
     Socialism, the "welfare" state, communism, fascism or any other 
type of dictatorship is based on the idea that groups of two or more 
persons can break the Laws of God with impunity as long as they are 
functioning as a government or part of a government.  The communist and 
socialists say that, "the end justifies the means."  In other words the 
goal sanctifies the method.
     The "welfare" statists in our country and other countries justify 
their actions on the same basis.  In order to cover their unconstitutional 
practices in this country our servants in government use the term "welfare" 
to describe these activities which transfer control of goods from the 
person who owns them or earns them to someone who does not own them or 
earn them.
     Writing in 1850, Frederic Bastiat in his essay, "The Law", defines 
this transfer of ownership as follows:  "But how is legal plunder to be 
identified?  Quite simply.  See if the law takes from some persons
what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not
belong.  See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another 
by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime." 
("The Law," Frederic Bastiat, page 25)
     It must be recognized that this act of legal plunder has many faces.  
No matter how "honorable" the goal if property, which includes money, 
is handled by those in government as explained above that action is 
immoral and unconstitutional.  It violates the function of government 
which is to protect life, liberty and property from the aggressive acts 
of others including our servants in the government.

13.  QUESTION:   What is the name given in English to that organization
which the people founded in the United States to protect their lives,
liberty and property?
     ANSWER:  Government.  In Webster's 1828 edition of his dictionary, 
he defines it as follows: "The system of polity in a state; that form 
of fundamental rules and principles by which a nation or state is governed, 
or by which individual members of a body politic are to regulate their 
social actions; a constitution, either written and public officers are 
prescribed and defined;"

14.  QUESTION:    Are governments created by people or are people 
created by governments?
     ANSWERS:	Governments are the creation of individuals and 
individuals are the creation of God.  The flow of authority is from God 
to the people and from the people to the government.  Since this is true
it should be evident that our servants who at any time make up the 
government cannot exercise any more authority than can the individual 
citizen.

15.  QUESTION:   Why do people form governments?
     ANSWER:  The purpose of government formation is to protect the lives, 
the liberties and the properties of peaceful citizens from unpeaceful 
citizens.  That purpose is described in the Declaration of Independence 
by our founding fathers in the following manner:  
     "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 are Life, 
     Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-
     "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted
     among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of 
     the governed,-"
     
     The Doctrine and Covenants 134:2 puts it this way:  
       "We believe that no government can exist in peace, except
       such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to 
       each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right
       and control of property, and the protection of life."

16.  QUESTION:  What is a peaceful citizen?
     ANSWER:   He is a person who obeys the laws of  God. He never 
commits an act of aggression against any other individual.  He does not 
resort to force except to defend his life, liberty, livelihood or
property from an aggressive person.
     Leonard E. Read wrote as follows in his excellent book ANYTHING 
THAT'S PEACEFUL on page 33:  "Defensive force is never an initial action.
It comes into play only secondarily, that is, as the antidote to 
aggressive force or violence.  Any individual has a moral right to defend 
his life, the fruits of his labor (that which sustains his life), and 
is liberty- by demeanor, by persuasion, or with a club if necessary. 
Defensive force is morally warranted."

17.  QUESTION:   What is an unpeaceful citizen?
     ANSWER:   He is a person who violates the laws of God.  He engages 
in acts or aggression against other individuals.  In other words, he 
initiates action against others to deprive them of their liberties,
properties or livelihoods.
     In the same book quoted above, Leonard E. Read, on page 33 explains, 
"The word 'violence,' as here used, refers to a particular kind of force.  
Customarily, the word is applied indiscriminately to two distinct kinds 
of force, each as different from the other as an olive branch differs 
from a gun. One is defensive or repellent force.  The other is initiated
or aggressive force.  If someone were to initiate such an action as flying
at you with a dagger, that would be an example of aggressive force.  
It is  this kind of force I call strife or violence.  The force you would
employ to repel the violence I would call defensive force.
     "Try to think of a single instance where aggressive force-strife
or violence-is normally warranted.  There is none.   Violence is morally 
insupportable!

18.  QUESTION:   What is the correct method for forming a government?
     ANSWER:    The only legitimate method that can be used is creation 
by the people who hold their rights from God.  They may delegate authority 
to whomever they please as long as everyone has reasonable representation
or if the group of people is small, they may create the government as 
a group.
     It must be kept in mind that the government created cannot exceed 
the authority of any one individual.  Also, the delegation of authority
is only temporary.  Its duration is determined by how well those servants 
in government keep within the bounds set by God in His laws to men.
     The moment those servants step beyond these bounds they destroy 
the compact between the creators, the people, and the created, those 
servants who make up the government.  The Declaration of Independence 
reads as follows on this subject:
     "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of 
these ends, (the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of 
Happiness) 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. But when a long 
train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object 
evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their 
right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide 
new Guards for their future security.-*

19.  QUESTION:  Does the delegation of authority prohibit the individual 
from using the right from which the authority is derived?
     ANSWER:   Since the individual receives the right from God and 
since God is the only one who can revoke the right, it is clear that 
the use of the right continues with the individual.  The only reason
for delegation of  authority is to make it possible for the individual 
to perform his primary functions more efficiently.
     For instance, and this the only authority legitimately delegated 
to our servants in government, the individual delegates authority to 
servants in government to keep the peace so he does not have to carry 
arms at all times to protect himself and his property.
     Samuel Adams, who wrote "The Rights of the Colonists" in 1772 put 
it this way, "In short, it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in
the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, 
to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving 
those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very 
nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defense 
of those very rights; the principle of which, as is before observed, are 
Life, Liberty and Property.  If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, 
should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right the 
eternal law or reason and the grand end of society would absolutely 
vacate such renunciation. 
     The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in 
the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave."
(THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, quoted on
page 368)

20.  QUESTION:   Does the servant in government acquire any rights when 
he is hired by the people?
     ANSWER:   Rights are inherent in the individual as a gift from God.
No right is conferred by the people when an individual is hired to become 
a part of the government.  Authority is conferred upon our servants in 
government to help upon our servants in government to help protect
our inherent and unalienable rights to life, liberty and private property.
Rights exist in the individual but cannot be transferred to our servants
in government.  Even though our servants are permitted to help us 
protect our rights, authority is not delegated to them to prohibit us 
from using our rights when it is necessary.  The only right which we 
hold from which we can delegate authority to our servants in the right 
of self-defense.  However,  the fact that we delegate authority to our 
servants to help in our defense does not remove our right to defend 
ourselves.  That right is unalienable and cannot be transferred.

21.  QUESTION:  What is the result when our servants exceed their
authority?
     ANSWER:  When the contract between the employer, the people, and 
the employee, our servants in government, is broken by our servants, 
the contract ceases to be binding and the authority of our servants 
ceases to exist.
     President John Taylor had the following to say on this subject: 
"It is said in the Doctrine and Covenants, that he that keepeth the
laws of God, hath no need to break the laws of the land.  It is further
explained in section 98, what is meant in relation to this That all 
laws which are constitutional must be obeyed, as follows:
     'And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, 
it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever
I command them. 
     'And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that 
principle of freedom in maintaining rights and  privileges, belongs to 
all mankind, and is justifiable before me;
     'Therefore I the Lord justify you and your brethern of the Church 
in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land.   
And as pertaining to laws of man, whatsoever is more or less than these 
cometh of evil.'
     "That is, taking this nation as an example, all laws that are
proper and correct, and all obligations entered into which are no 
violative of the constitution, then the compact between the rulers and 
the ruled is broken and the obligation ceases to be binding.  Just as 
a person agreeing to purchase anything and to pay a certain amount for 
it, if he receives the article bargained for, and does no pay its price,
he violates his contract; but if he does not receive the article he is 
not required to pay for it."  (President John Taylor, 1884, JD-26:350)
     The following from President Joseph F. Smith is also relevant to 
the above question; "We are told here that no man need break the laws 
of the land who will keep the laws of God. (D&C 58:21)  But this is 
further defined by the passage which I read afterwards - the law of the 
land, which all have no need to break, is that law which is the 
Constitutional law of the land, and that is a as God himself has defined 
it.  And whatsoever in more or less than this cometh of evil. (D&C 98:4-10) 
Now it seems to me that this makes this matter so clear that it is not
possible for any man who professes to be a member of the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to make any mistakes, or to be in doubt
as to the course he should pursue under the command of God in relation
to the observance of the laws of the land.  I maintain that the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has ever been faithful to the
constitutional laws of our country.  I maintain also, that I have a right 
to this opinion, as an American citizen, as one who was not only born on
American soil, but who descended from parents who for generations
were born in America.  I have a right to interpret the law in this manner,
and to form my own conclusions and express my opinions thereon,
regardless of the opinions of  other men.
     "I ask myself, What law have you broken?  What constitutional law 
have you not observed?  I am bound not only by allegiance to the govern- 
ment of the United States, but by the actual command of God Almighty, 
to observe and obey every constitutional law of the land, and without 
hesitancy I declare to this congregation that I have never violated, 
nor transgressed any law, I am not amenable to any penalties of the law, 
because I have endeavored from my youth up to be a law-abiding citizen, 
and not only so, but to be a peacemaker, a preacher of righteousness, 
and not only to preach righteousness by word, but by example.  What 
therefore have I to fear?  The Lord Almighty requires this people to 
observe the laws of the land, to be subject to the 'powers that be,' 
so far as they abide by the fundamental principles of good government,
by He will hold them responsible if they will pass unconstitutional 
measures and frame unjust and proscriptive laws, as did Nebuchadnezzer 
and Darius, in relation to the three Hebrew children and Daniel.  If 
lawmakers have a mind to violate their oath, break their covenants and 
their faith with the people, and depart from the provisions of the 
Constitution where is the law human or divine, which binds me, as an 
individual, to outwardly and openly proclaim my acceptance of their 
acts?
     "I firmly believe that the only way in which we can be sustained
in regard to this matter by God our Heavenly Father is by following the 
illustrious examples we find in holy writ.  And while we regret, and 
look with sorrow upon the acts of men who seek to bring us into bondage 
and to oppress us, we must obey God, for He had declared that in obeying 
the laws which He has given us we will not necessarily break the 
constitutional laws of the land." (President Joseph F. Smith, 1882, 
JD- 23:70,71)

22.  QUESTION:  What is the right and the duty of the people when laws
are used to create and maintain tyranny?
     ANSWER:  The Declaration of Independence answers the above question 
as follows: "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 are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit 
of Happiness.  That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted 
among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
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 
INSTITUTED 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. . . .But when a long train of 
abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object invices a
design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it 
is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards 
for their future security."

23.  QUESTION:  What is the responsibility of the individual when laws
are written  that violate the Constitution and the laws of God?
     ANSWER:   The D&C 134:5 states that it is our responsibility to 
"sustain and uphold" the government only so long as the laws uphold our 
inherent and inalienable rights.  It reads as follows:  "We believe that 
all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in 
which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable 
rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion 
are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished 
accordingly; and that all governments have a right to  enact such laws 
as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public 
interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of
conscience."
     On this same subject, William Blackstone in his COMMENTARIES has 
the following to say:  "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature 
and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no 
human laws should be suffered to contradict these" To instance in the 
case of murder; this is expressly forbidden by the divine; and 
demonstrably by the natural law; and from these prohibitions arises
the true unlawfullness of this crime.  Those human laws that annex a
punishment to it do not at all increase its moral guilt, or superadd and
fresh obligation in foro conscientiae (in the court of conscience) to
abstain from its perpetration.  Nay, if any human law should allow or
enjoin us to commit it, we are bound to transgress the human law, or
else we must offend both the natural and the divine." (THE CHRISTIAN
HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION,  quoted on page 143)
     The following from John Locke will throw further light on the above
question:  "But though this be a State of Liberty, yet it is not a
State License; thought Man in that State have an uncontrollable Liberty,
to dispose of his Person or Possessions, yet he has not Liberty to 
destroy himself, or so much as any Creature in his Possession, but
where some nobler Use, than its bare Preservation calls for it.  The 
State of Nature has a Law of  Nature to govern it, which obliges every 
one;  And Reason, which is that Law, teaches all Mankind, who will but
consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm
another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possessions.  For Men being all
the Workmanship of one Omnipotent, and infinitely wise Maker;  All the
Servants of one Sovereign Master, sent in the World by his Order, and
about his Business, they are his Property, whose Workmanship they are,
made to last during his, not one anothers Pleasure;  And being furnished
with like Faculties, sharing all in one Community of Nature, there cannot
be supposed any such Subordination among us, that may authorize us to
destroy one another, as if we were made of one another's Uses, as the
inferior ranks of  Creatures are for ours.  Every one as he is bound to
preserve himself, and not to quit his Station wilfully, so by the like
reason, when his own Preservation comes not in Competition, ought he,
as much as he can, to preserve the rest of Mankind, and may not unless
it be to do Justice on an Offender, take away, or impair the Life, or
what tends to the Preservation of the Life, the Liberty, Health, Limb, 
or Goods of  another."  (THE CHRISTIAN HISTORY OF THE CONSTITUTION, quoted
on page 58)


24.  QUESTION:    According to the preamble to the Constitution, who
created the Constitution?
     ANSWER:   The preamble reads, "We the people of the United States, 
in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquillity, provide for  the common defense, promote the general 
welfare, and  secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our 
posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United
States of America."
     To answer this question accurately it is necessary to examine each 
of the purposes separately.
     The first purpose for which the Constitution was formed was to 
"form a more perfect Union. . ." It was a fact that during the war
for Independence the Articles of Confederation often proved inadequate
to the conduct of the war.  Later most of the States functioned
separately and often at odds with each other.   Different geographical
areas cooperated against other geographical areas.
     For these and other reasons the framers wanted to create a form 
of government which would increase the Union among the States.  However, 
it must be recognized that the framers were representatives of the 
States as well as the people.  Because of this they created a framework 
which restricted the national organization to certain specified areas
of conduct.
     In a letter to Elbridge Gerry of Massachusets dated, Philadelphia,
Jan. 26, 1799, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I am for preserving to the States 
the Powers not yielded by them to the Union, & to the legislature of 
the Union its constitutional share in the division of powers; and I am 
not for transferring all the powers of the States to the general govern-
ment, & all those of that government to the Executive branch."
     The second reason or purpose for which the Constitution was written 
was to "establish justice."
     Very seldom during the history of the peoples of this earth has 
justice prevailed for all the citizens of any country.  Our founding
fathers argued for many years with King George III and Parliament in 
the ineffectual attempt to obtain justice at their hands.  Then they 
fought a better seven year war for the same reason.
     It is natural, after these experiences to find our founders 
attempting to establish justice in their new country.  
     Justice according to the 1828 edition of Noah Webster's dictionary 
is, "The virtue which consists in giving to every one what is his due;" 
in law it "consists in distributing to every man that right or equity
which the laws of equity require;". . . in other works, "Impartiality."
     Justice then must require that all citizens are treated fairly,
equally and impartially under the law.  No one, no matter who he is or
what his station in life, should receive any treatment under the law
which would benefit him above any of his fellow citizens.
     The third purpose for establishing the Constitution was to "insure 
domestic tranquillity," The function of our servants who make up the 
government is to keep the peace, or to protect peaceful citizens form
unpeaceful citizens or aliens.  Since this function has to do with
domestic tranquillity, it covers those activities which take place within 
the country.
     This activity, keeping the peace, is normally handled on a local 
basis by the county sheriff.  However, if the trouble crosses state
lines the national government may become involved.
     Disputes between States can be settled in federal courts under the 
laws created to serve this purpose.
     In the case of a rebellion against constitutional laws the national 
government can step in to protect the rights of the citizens who are 
not in rebellion.  However, as the signers of  the Declaration of 
Independence discovered, our employees who make up the government
sometimes become aggressors against their own citizens through writing 
and enforcing unconstitutional statutes.  Because of this problem
with Great Britain the signers declared, *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 are Life,
Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.  That to these rights, Governments
are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent 
of the governed.  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. . .But when a long train of abuses 
and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design 
to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their
duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for 
their future security."
     The fourth reason for creating the Constitution is to "provide for 
the common defense.,". . .
     In our society today our servants have substituted the word "provide"
for "promote".  Our founders used the word promote on purpose.  They 
did not intend to provide for anyone.  It  was their purpose to encourage 
individual welfare through freedom to work, to save and to invest...
     General welfare is promoted only when everyone benefits from what 
is done.  It is  just possible that the only way to promote or encourage 
what is good for everyone is to provide freedom or liberty to everyone.
     Acts which transfer control of income or property from the owner 
to the non-owner constitute acts of plunder and do not benefit anyone.  
Acts which increase freedom within God's law benefit everyone because
there is no responsibility without freedom and there is no freedom 
without responsibility.
     Liberty and freedom exist only when responsible citizens restrain 
themselves.  If every citizen and alien resisted the temptation to
plunder every other individual, no government would be necessary. 
Government is necessary only to curtail those who will not live within 
the laws of God.
     It is important to note that our founders created the Constitution 
not only to secure the blessings of liberty for themselves but for their 
posterity as well.  This document was designed to be an ongoing document 
which would guarantee liberty into the future.
     God has placed his stamp of approval on this idea in the following 
words  "Again I say unto you, those who have been scattered by their 
enemies, it is my will that they should  continue to importune for 
redress, and redemption, by the hands of those who are placed as rulers 
and are in authority over you- According to the laws and constitution 
of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be 
maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to 
just and holy principles;
     That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to 
futurity, according to the moral agency which I have unto him, that
every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.
     Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage on 
to another.
     And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this 
land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, 
and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood."  (D&C 101:77-80)

People have taken the test!