By Joseph Perkins, The San Diego Union-Tribune
November-December 1994 – Every year about this time, the ghost of James Madison is said to appear at his old estate at Montpelier. “What have they done to the Bill of Rights?” the sad specter asks.
Madison drafted the first 10 amendments to the U. S. Constitution to satisfy the minds of well meaning opponents of the document who feared that it vested too much authority in the central government, while providing too few protections for individual citizens.
For much of the past two centuries since it was ratified December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights served this republic well. But over the past three decades or so, the principles of liberty and freedom set forth in the document have become so badly corrupted that Madison himself hardly would recognize his handiwork.
None of the 10 amendments has been more grossly distorted than the First, which specifies that no law will be enacted that establishes a state religion, or abridges freedom of speech or of the press. Just look where that has brought us.
Since 1962, prayer has been banned in public schools because it offends the sensibilities of the godless. This is a legacy of the Warren Court, which did more to subvert Madison’s original intent than any Supreme Court in history. It matters not if, say, a prayer is nondenominational, or that a student may be excused from reciting it if he or she so desires.
“Any state-sanctioned religious utterance amounts to an unconstitutional attempt to establish religion,” the high court held.
Once this dubious constitutional principle was established, the godless element in American society took full advantage. They’ve sued, for instance, to have Nativity scenes removed from public property during the holiday season. They’ve petitioned to have crosses removed from public grounds, like Mt. Soledad here in San Diego.
While this bogus constitutional attack on religion is going on, the free speech clause of the First Amendment is being exploited by purveyors of crudity and obscenity, often this material is passed off as art. And in not a few cases it is publicly funded.
Like the photographic art of Joel-Peter Witkin. His more noteworthy works include Testicle Stretch with the Possibility of a Crushed Face, Woman Castrating a Man, and Mask and Severed Genitalia at Netsuke.
No less offensive (however unsupported by taxpayer dollars) are the violent and misogynistic lyrics often heard from hard rock and “gangsta” rap groups. Like these lyrics from rockers Motley Crue: “Not a woman, but a whore/Well now I’m killing you...watch your face turn blue.” Or from rapper Dr. Dre: “Rat-a-tat and a tat like that. Never hesitate to put a nigga’ on his back.”
Is this the free speech that the founders meant to protect? Hardly.
The criminal justice provisions of the Bill of Rights – which are included in the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth amendments – have been almost as badly adulterated over the past quarter-century as the various freedoms set forth in the First Amendment.
The founders felt it was important to provide protections for the accused to ensure that they were treated justly. They did not want citizens suspected of crimes to be routinely rounded up by the government and tossed into dungeons without benefit of a fair trial. And they did not want those convicted of crimes to be subject to torture and similar inhumane punishments.
So the Bill of Rights proscribes unreasonable search and seizures. It requires due process of the law. It guarantees a speedy and public trial. It protects against self-incrimination. And it forbids cruel and unusual punishment.
Since 1966, when the Warren Court somehow read into the Constitution that police were obliged to inform suspects of their rights (the famous Miranda decision), the rights of the accused have expanded far beyond the founders’ intent.
If say, the police have a warrant to search a home for possible stolen property, and turn up illegal drugs in the process, they have to ignore the drugs. If they take the suspects into custody for drug possession, the case will probably get thrown out on grounds of unlawful search.
Along the same lines, if a criminal is apprehended during commission of a crime, and the arresting officers forget to read him his rights, any defense lawyer worth his salt can get the criminal off on that technicality.
The founders could not possibly have intended the Bill of Rights to be interpreted as it is today. They hardly meant to outlaw public acknowledgment of the Creator or to provide cover for obscene and patently offensive forms of expression. They hardly meant for criminals to be coddled. Only that justice prevail throughout the republic.
James Madison must be spinning in his grave. 
