Reply #12: I think one of the most troubling aspects of this... [View All]

[benEzra]

is the blithe acceptance of the idea that the government has the power to "declare martial law" and "suspend the Bill of Rights" in the first place, even by the media (who should know better).

The Constitution authorizes the suspension of ONE civil right in dire national emergencies, and that is the right of habeus corpus under certain very limited circumstances, i.e. ONLY in case of "Rebellion or Invasion." Not merely a city on fire, not an earthquake, not a bad storm. And nowhere is the government authorized to suspend any of the freedoms in the Bill of Rights, whether the right to speak or assemble peaceably, the right to own and use guns, the right to be free from warrantless searches/seizures, etc.; there is no Disaster Exception Clause in the Bill of Rights.

I'm not sure where the idea came from that all the President (or Congress) has to do is mouth the words "Martial Law," and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights magically disappear and America is automatically under military rule. The supreme law of this land is the U.S. Constitution, not the whim of some government official, and I would hope that most clergy wouldn't shill for such a power grab.