The beautiful thing about our Constitution is that the freedoms afforded in it pertain to every person equally. But there's talk of forming a secular constitution. Joining us today is Jorge Gomez (firstliberty.org), Content Strategist and Writer for First Liberty Institute. He looks at the clause that isn't there – separation of church and state, as well as the freedom that is there – namely religious freedom in the First Amendment. Our Constitution stands for everyone, but under a secular constitution, the state is the ultimate power. Religious groups would then not receive fair and equal treatment, depending on who is in power. It's important to remember: if the state can grant the rights, the state can take the rights away.
For our last daily podcast of 2020, we are firing up the way back machine to revisit the issue of a constitutional convention. Or as John has referred to it – a Con-Con. First up, we go back to December 1992 with Don Fotheringham, an opponent to the Con-Con, who suggests that once the door to amending the Constitution for freedom-loving reasons is opened, others with more malignant motives will come through to work their will.
Then we transition to June 2016 with Jenna Ellis, before she was an attorney for President Trump. She argues that a convention of states would help limit the power of federal government and because there would be a specified agenda and a very involved amendment process, it would be all but impossible to hijack.
We'll leave our listeners to decide for themselves if a convention to amend the Constitution would be a good idea. Let us know your opinion.