Little Jimmy Madison Would Have Nullified Homosexual Marriage By Supreme Court – Here’s WHY

todaySeptember 11, 2015 16

share close


Order Your hardback copy of Life of George Washington, out of print since 1920 but available now from Mike Church & Founding Father Films publishing
Order Your hardback copy of Life of George Washington, out of print since 1920 but available now from Mike Church & Founding Father Films publishing

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – There’s some fascinating stuff to discover in this that the Virginians were proposing.  If we read from the report of 1799 — this won’t take very long — this is basically little Jimmy Madison’s summary of what the Virginia Assembly had decided.  Pay very close attention to a couple things here.  One is the Supremacy Clause.  Check out today’s transcript for the rest….

FOLKS, a message from Mike – The Audio Clip of The Day files, Project 76 feature presentations, Church Doctrine audio & video clips and everything else on this site are supported by YOU. We have over 70, of my personally designed, written, produced and directed products for sale in the Founders Tradin’ Post, 24/7,  here. You can also support our efforts with a Founders Pass membership granting total access to years of My work for just .17 cents per day. Not convinced? Take the tour! Thanks for 18 years of mike! – Mike


Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  When the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed by the Congress in 1798, and President Adams signed them into law, and then when he started executing them, and then when he had a Virginia newspaper editorialist or publisher arrested under them, imprisoned, this is when the assembly, the Virginia Assembly decided they must act.  They didn’t just decide this.  Working behind the scenes on this was little Jimmy Madison, was John Taylor of Caroline County, was Thomas Jefferson, was George Nicholas, was Edmund Pendleton and others.  They had been increasingly alarmed since the Constitution went into effect that the new general government was grabbing powers that no one had foreseen that they would grab.  It was doing things that had not been enumerated as powers that they should be able to exercise.  This was very disconcerting to these guys, to the point where it was thought that something needed to be done about it. [/private]

What was done?  The Virginia Assembly met in December of 1798 and decided that they were going to interpose against the imposition of the alien part of the Sedition Act.  They would also interposes against the sedition part.  Bear in mind that Kentucky had already done this.  Kentucky’s assembly had met in late September and early October of 1798, and by the early part of November they had passed what are known today as the Kentucky Resolutions.  Go look them up online.  You can Google search them, Bing search them, whatever search you want to use, Yahoo search.  You could even go to a library and get them.  Read the Kentucky Resolutions, basically authored by Thomas Jefferson.  Of course, he couldn’t say he was authoring them because he was the Vice President of the United States at the time.  It had to appear as if someone else was the author.  That’s the way it appeared.  It was Jefferson’s handiwork for the most part.

When the battle moved to the State of Virginia and its assembly, it was James Madison that did most of the heavy lifting in writing them.  Two pretty good authorities here on the extent of federal power.  At the top of next hour we’ll have Professor Kevin Gutzman with us and he will add some more historical gravitas to this.  There’s a book that you can purchase or you can find it in most libraries called The Virginia report of 1799-1800 . . . the Virginia resolutions of December 21, 1798 . . . .  If you’d like to read the two speeches that were given by John Taylor of Caroline County in defense of what I’m about to share with you, they’re in my book John Taylor of Caroline County – American Statesman.  The only place where I am aware of that they have actually been published and are available in digital form is in my book, John Taylor of Caroline County – American Statesman, both of his speeches on behalf of or acting on behalf of what little Jimmy Madison would call interposition.

There’s some fascinating stuff to discover in this that the Virginians were proposing.  If we read from the report of 1799 — this won’t take very long — this is basically little Jimmy Madison’s summary of what the Virginia Assembly had decided.  Pay very close attention to a couple things here.  One is the Supremacy Clause.  When the general Leviathan monstrosity is and is not supreme.  Two: When it is not supreme, who is?  Three: When you determine who is, what should they do?  These are the questions that are at issue right now with the civil religion high priests or high priestesses.  You know it as the Supreme Court.  That’s what it is.  It is basically a college of Bishops that meet to determine moral theology and moral policy as the American sheeple are going to practice it.  Some of us appropriately reject that authority.  You should be in that number and reject that authority.  The Constitution doesn’t have a D-A-M-N thing to say about it, but, of course, to say that is to deny the civil religion that is Americanism.  No one is going to do that that sings the Star Spangled Banner and pledges allegiance before a college football game on Saturday.  You see how all these things are interconnected here?

Let’s fast forward to the third resolution proposed in Virginia.  If this history bores some of you to tears, the ‘70s channel is on 7.  My preferred channel, which is one of the easy-listening, classical channels that doesn’t destroy brain cells as I digest it is on 76.  I suggest you tune in there and then come back later when we’re talking more positively about ‘Murica.  Others can call us and voice your displeasure at these dalliances into actual history and departures from Huffington Post, Fox News, et al. mythology.  This is from Madison’s report.  This is all quoted directly:


The third resolution is in the words following:–

“That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact . . .

[end reading]

Mike:  Underscore that word compact.  What’s a compact, Mr. Church?  [mocking] “Come on, Mike, get back to bashing Obama.  What does any of this crap matter?”  That’s right, none of this matters.  Again, ‘70s on 7, classics on 76.


. . . as resulting from the compact to which the states are parties, as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting that compact—[Mike: I think they’re referring to the Constitution. Don’t tell anyone.] as no further valid than they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that, in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil and for maintaining, within their respective limits, the authorities, rights, and liberties, appertaining to them.”

[end reading]

Mike:  If you read nothing else today, read that.  That’s the third Virginia Resolution, beautiful in its simplicity.  What you just heard was quite possibly the best single, solitary, one-paragraph-long description, accurate description of what constitutes the power of the federal government and that the remaining power that does not constitute it is retained by the states and the people.  You may have heard of this thing called the Constitution.  You may have also heard that there’s this set of amendments that are attached to it, the first ten of which are known as the thing called the Bill of Rights.  Read Article 9 and Article 10 of said Bill of Rights.  I pretty much just repeated them to you, or little Jimmy Madison just repeated them to you.  That’s what the resolution says.

Here’s Madison’s commentary on it.  If you’re already dismayed and angered or confused, you’re about to be more dismayed, angered, or confused.  If you’re enjoying this and you’re benefiting from it, you’re about to be far more joyous because Madison then fleshes the argument out and says: Okay, what’s the counter argument to this?  Can we defeat it?  Here we go:


On this resolution the committee have bestowed all the attention which its importance merits. They have scanned it not merely with a strict, but with a severe eye; and they feel confidence in pronouncing that, in its just and fair construction, it is unexceptionably true in its several positions, as well as constitutional and conclusive in its inferences.

The resolution declares, first, that “it views the powers of the federal government as resulting from the compact to which the states are parties;” in other words, that the federal powers are derived from the Constitution; and that the Constitution is a compact to which the states are parties.

Clear as the position must seem, that the federal powers are derived from the Constitution, and from that alone, the committee are not unapprized of a late doctrine which opens another source of federal powers, not less extensive and important than it is new and unexpected. The examination of this doctrine will be most conveniently connected with a review of a succeeding resolution. The committee satisfy themselves here with briefly remarking that, in all the contemporary discussions and comments which the Constitution underwent, it was constantly justified and recommended on the ground that the powers not given to the government were withheld from it; [Mike: Did you catch that?] and that, if any doubt could have existed on this subject, under the original text of the Constitution, it is removed, as far as words could remove it, by the 12th amendment, now a part of the Constitution, which expressly declares, “that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

[end reading]

Mike:  What did we just learn?  We’re only two paragraphs into this brilliance by little Jimmy Madison in January of 1799.  What did we just learn?  We just learned basically that there was not a soul alive that agitated for, lobbied for, promoted on behalf of ratifying the Constitution that the powers that were going to be granted to the new federal government — remember, this is in 1798 now and 1799 — that those powers were going to be expressly limited and were only going to apply and only could be applied by the new government where it had been granted authority.

I’m going to say this again.  I’ll repeat it from last Wednesday, last Thursday, from conversations over the long Labor Day holiday, and here for edification this morning.  The State of Kentucky, when it ratified the Constitution, retained power over civil domestic proceedings.  Not some of them, all of them.  Every single solitary one of them.  Let’s move on, shall we?  There’s been no amendment under which the State of Kentucky or any state for that matter has rescinded that authority, has granted it or enumerated it to the Feds.  If they did, then all would have to grant it or enumerate it.

As a matter of fact, you radical homosexual revelers in Ms. Davis’s incarceration have been the benefit of this.  See: civil marriage laws passed in your favor in the State of Massachusetts, in the State of Vermont, in the State of Oregon.  I might have complained and said I disagree fundamentally that the state shouldn’t be doing this and that they certainly shouldn’t be doing that, but I also always recognized that that was Massachusetts’ authority that they were exercising.  Unfortunately, marriage has fallen into governmental purview.  We can’t do anything about that right now.  The question is: Who has the power?  Where is it exercised?  Is it exercised by Anthony Kennedy and Darth Vader Ginsberg or is it exercised by the State of Kentucky?  Is it exercised by the State of Massachusetts, by the State of Virginia? [/private]

Order Your Produce[r] T-shirt today!
Order Your Produce[r] T-shirt today!
Folks, the legal and historical answer to the question is not at issue here.  It is exercised by the states, end of story.  Slam the book closed and don’t tell anyone tell you otherwise, Supremacy Clause imbecility notwithstanding.  That’s the argument.  That’s the only argument.  But we won’t hear that argument today.  No, no, no, Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly said the Supremacy Clause when it comes to [insert here].  Brian Williams said.  Hoda Kotb said.  John Berman and Christine Romans said blah.  Whatever.

To repeat and reiterate, there is no legal or political or historical context in which the municipal authority was ever transferred to the general leviathan.  If that indeed has happened, I must have missed it.  Professor Gutzman, at the top of next hour, will tell you that he must have missed it.  By the way, there’s another point that’s at issue here, that is, whether or not the same general government can be the sole arbiter of the extent of its own powers.  Who in their right mind would ever enter into an agreement like that?  In other words, does anyone else get a say so in what the extent of these powers are that are granted to the general government, or are they the alpha and omega of it?

End Mike Church Show Transcript

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
author avatar

Written by: AbbyMcGinnis

Rate it

Post comments (0)

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x