I was going to begin this blog by saying “If you had an elementary school level education you would know that the statement in the title of this blog is ludicrous.” But then I recalled some statements which I have heard lately coming out of the mouth of supposedly learned people who have not only college degrees but advance degrees. Some of these people are actually in leadership positions in our governments: local, state and national positions.
Proof of innocence, beyond a reasonable doubt?
That statement turns the US Constitution on its’ head. The Constitution is quite clear in what it says the burden of proof in a lawful situation is. The one who must prove his case is the “accuser”. If the accuser cannot bring forth evidence that proves the accusation beyond a reasonable doubt, then the “accused” does not have to prove a thing. The “accuser” must prove “beyond a reasonable doubt”. In other words, the jury must approach the case from the viewpoint of doubt.
It is only when the evidence in the case becomes so convincing of the crime that the jury may then entertain the possibility of the crime being factual.
How are facts brought into the case? Our Constitution is based on Biblical principles and one of those principles incorporated in our Constitution is that a thing must be corroborated by two or three witnesses. If there is only one witness, a crime may not be considered a fact. One witness is not enough to determine a crime. This is not to say that evidences other than spoken words describing a crime cannot be introduced. Fingerprints, blood samples, and DNA can also be witnesses when properly used in a case. But one witness is not enough to determine guilt.
We alluded to types of witnesses above, fingerprints, blood type, DNA witnesses which are forensic in nature. They do not speak, per se, but in the hands of those who can adjudicate them they can be convincing if a crime has been committed. However, one must keep in mind that there must be someone to interpret the evidences which are found. It would be incumbent that any biases of the interpreter not be infused in the final presentation of the facts.
Because forensic evidence has this bias possibility the findings are quite often questioned as to their real validity.
Back to the main point
The accused is under no pressure to prove his innocence. The term “proof of innocence” in the legal sense is, as I stated, ludicrous. The accused is, because the burden of proof is on the accuser, presumed innocent. The presumption of innocence is nowhere in the constitution, but by the very nature of the fact that the burden of proving guilt is on the accuser that the accused must be “presumed innocent”.
What are we to think
After seeing how some so-called lawmakers have been behaving over the past several weeks in their endeavor to malign a man who by all accounts has lived an exemplary life, one may wonder what to think of those people. The man they demean has purported himself as a son, a friend, a husband, a father and a civil servant in such a way that for fifty years nothing but the highest adulation has been heaped upon him.
Yet, when supporters of things as mothers murdering their babies in the womb, or those who live in a deviant lifestyle, or propose letting illegal practices be carried on when they are clearly against the law of the land, these people forget(that is if they ever knew) the law of the land and stand against a man who has by his life stood for decency and goodness and Godliness. They exalted their own cravings for power and debauchery over the law of the land, the Constitution.
They were so blinded by their craving for power that it did not matter whom they had to step on to achieve that goal. They lied, they belittled, they screamed and they pouted. They misused and abused the pawns that they used to come against a just man. They have become like the god that they worship.
Who is their god?
Their god is the god of this world. The god of this world is the one who has blinded them. They actually think that they are doing something “good”. In the title of this blog, “Proof of Innocence – Beyond a Reasonable Doubt”, I used the term “reasonable”. Their approach to this whole situation is anything but reasonable.
How can they get away with this? It is for at least two generations of young people these people have positioned themselves in our education system and have set out to, what I call, “dumb down” our education system. It was becoming evident when I was in high school in the 1960’s. But it is in full bloom now. When I was in high school you could not graduate if you did not pass Civics, which was taught in the tenth grade. Civics was the study of how our government is constructed and how it works. You had to know the Bill of Rights and be familiar with the Constitution. Prior to that, in the seventh grade you had to memorize the Declaration of Independence.
In the twelfth grade you had to pass American History or you could not graduate. Do any college graduates have knowledge of real American History? From what we see today, it is doubtful that many do have that knowledge.
Today, people are actually given college degrees and have no idea what the Bill of Rights are or what are the branches of our Federal Government and what each is supposed to do. Believe it or not, some of these people are members of our government and have no idea what they are doing.
Who are they
These past few weeks you have seen some of these people in action. If the problem were only that they thought that innocence had to be proved, that would be something that could be easily put to rest just by sitting them down and reading the Constitution to them. After all, when they assumed the office they have, they swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States. We must conclude that they are totally ignorant or they are enemies of the United States of America and its Constitution.
It is one thing to be lacking in knowledge, but it is another to say that you swear to uphold the Constitution and then purposefully determine to undermine it. That is wickedness and subversion.
By their own words and actions
These people, by their own words and actions, declared themselves guilty as enemies of the Constitution and of the country that it stands for.
Time to stand
This is not just patriots standing against devious people, it is good against evil. If we try to water down the situation to anything less than good versus evil, we shall play into the enemy’s hands. It is no longer viable to just be a good person. Evil people will run over you. You must now be bold and speak out for righteousness and goodness. Anything less is not acceptable.
There is only one way to be righteous and that is through a right relationship with your Creator. There is only one way that your Creator will accept, and that is the man, Christ Jesus. If you think you can stand against evil with anything less, you are deluded and believe a lie.
The results of where we stand and what we accomplish will determine the eternal situation of millions of people. Those of us who call ourselves “Christians” have not exercised the power that has been given us by the Holy Spirit.