Sam Rohrer:                  Today, ladies and gentlemen, this very day, our nation, it does sit, it does sit on the brink of collapse. Now, please understand what I’m saying. I don’t make that statement with any kind of joy. I don’t make it with any intent to be sensational. And that happens all the time. And that’s the wrong thing when things are said to be sensational. But in this case, it really is the truth in many ways.

                                    And with that, I want to welcome you to the program. I’m Sam Rohrer, and I’m going to be joined today by the entire team: Dave Kistler, president of Hope to the Hill and president of our North Carolina Pastors Network, and Dr. Gary Dull, pastor of Faith Baptist Church, Altoona, Pennsylvania, and the executive director of the Pennsylvania Pastors Network. And today, we’re going to have a very special guest who I’m going to introduce more fully in just a minute. But he is former US Senator and Congressman from the state of Oklahoma, Dr. Tom Coburn.

                                    I’m going to say now, besieged from within, by the establishment, often referred to as the deep state, those globalists who really do seek totalitarian control, open borders, destruction of borders, actually, oftentimes accompanied with a dethroning of God in America, as was the goal of Karl Marx, this group of idealist, both Republicans and Democrats, they commonly despise the restraint of the Constitution. They don’t really at all like the concept of a limited federal government and the founder’s belief that power and authority in our nation really comes from God and is vested in the people.

                                    Now, you combine that with the kinds of challenges that face our nation, a national debt of over $22 trillion and climbing, a national education system that is really designed to indoctrinate not educate, and then you combine that with what we see happening down in our border right now, a true border crisis that’s threatening, not just economic collapse, but national collapse. We can’t handle it without a stronger hand from the federal government, probably, and being encouraged. As we talk about oftentimes here, the red, green access of Marxist and Islamic enemies who are to our south in Venezuela in that whole area, Russia, China, and Iran, all of them working together to try to destabilize this light on the hill.

                                    Now you take and you put all those things together with a generally silent pulpit in America, in a church that really is infiltrated by cowardice, and deception, and a lot of apostasies. That’s why I say we as a nation sit on the brink. Now, these factors contribute to the rise of those arrogant promoters of totalitarianism now shamelessly running around the country calling for open socialism, greater federal spending, and a greater consolidated government. All these things we talk about on this program regularly. So if you join us, you know we talk about solutions, Biblical solutions, constitutional solutions, historical solutions.

                                    Today, we want to talk about a constitutional solution found within Article Five of the US Constitution, a solution promoted by many people having now passed three states and growing. It’s what we often refer to as the convention of states. Today, were going to focus on this specific constitutional solution with our special guest, US Senator Tom Coburn. Our theme for the day: a convention of states constitutional firewall against socialism.

                                    And with that, let me welcome to the program right now, Dr. Tom Coburn from Oklahoma. Dr. Coburn, Senator Coburn, Tom, all of those things and above, thanks for being on the program today.

Tom Coburn:                 Well, it’s certainly my pleasure. I might want to make one correction. We have 15 states that have passed Article Five application.

Sam Rohrer:                  That’s a great one to correct me on. Thank you much, yeah, because I thought it was much higher, but I had seen that. So that’s a great thing. Ladies and gentlemen, Senator Coburn from Oklahoma, 10 years in the U S Senate. He left only because he had set a term limit for himself. Three terms as Congressman from Oklahoma, has distinguished himself on matters of fighting for limited government and fighting against bribery and fraud and all of those kinds of things. So, with that, Senator, I want to get right into it. We don’t need to probably describe the need that we have. I want to go right directly to Article Five and take us right there immediately and answer this question for us if you can. What does Article Five say about the convention of states, and why do you think that that is the recipe for our need today?

Tom Coburn:                 Well, let me if I may, let me give you some background.

Sam Rohrer:                  Sure.

Tom Coburn:                 Two days before the constitutional convention was concluded, Colonel George Mason stood up and said, “Gentlemen, we’ve made a grievous error. Are we so naive to believe that if a government that becomes a tyranny, will by itself limit its own tyranny?” We’ve only allowed the congress to change this Constitution by making two-thirds of the Congress pass it and then send it to states, where in fact we have, what we should be doing is allowing the states to start a change in the Constitution, but requiring two-thirds to call an amendments convention.

                                    So, what happened was, is Madison recorded with that comment that there was no debate. Everybody said, “Of course you’re right.” It’s the only thing they didn’t have frustrating debate about in the whole constitutional convention according to Madison’s notes. So, they added Article Five second part to the Constitution, and then they ended up finishing.

                                    And they put that in there because they knew we would be where we are today because history had taught them that. The two major republics before ours were Greece and Rome, and they all failed on the same reasons why we’re failing today. And that is, lack of fiscal discipline and loss of virtue. And so, we talked a little bit before the show on virtue, you know … Oh, Tocqueville said, “America will be great as long as America is good. When America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” And what he was saying is you’ll lose your republic.

                                    And so, virtue is a key battle that we lost because public education is now controlled by Washington. And it’s, it’s about indoctrination, not education, not teaching thought, not teaching thinking patterns, not teaching ethics, not teaching or towards none of the things that we were taught in school or being taught today. So, there’s a key to it.

                                    So, going back to Article Five, it is actually the only solution that’s big enough for the problems that we have. And let me describe the problem after 16 years of being in Congress. The problem is the enumerated powers that the Constitution gives to Congress have been totally ignored. And they’ve bought off the stage with grants and monies with all these hooks on it that you have to do what we want done in Washington if you want some of your money back. So consequently, we now have a federal government that controls almost 60% of every state legislator’s budget.

Sam Rohrer:                  We’re talking today on Stand in the Gap today with our special guest, former US Senator Tom Coburn from the state of Oklahoma. The issue is a convention of states, a constitutional firewall against socialism. Now, Article Five of the US Constitution reads in part, it says this, quote, “Whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, or on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of this Constitution,” and then it goes on and it completes that thought.

                                    The point is that the provision for the calling of a convention of the states is referred to by some as an emergency reset button permitting the several states to recalibrate, to correct, to perhaps reset in alignment of authority and power between the federal government and the several states who, as we’ve just heard from the senator, have really yielded their sovereign authority almost being bribed by federal government money.

                                    Now, often confused by many and unheard of by even more is this provision referred to as a convention of states, and that this emergency button as it’s called is not only necessary now … I’m going to insert there … may likely be the only constitutional reset button available to the people and the several states short of a far more extreme and unpredictable means.

                                    Now, Dr. Coburn … I’m calling you doctor because you are a senator, but you are also our friend, Tom. Please state again. You were going down that road, but the purpose for this provision, this emergency button as it’s called, I think you’ve referred to it as that itself. What did the founders potentially anticipate as a need for the states to force changes, and do those changes or do those conditions that they perhaps envisioned, do they exist today?

Tom Coburn:                 Sure, and if you think about founding principles that we were to have three branches of government, and each one have being a check on the other, and that everything outside of the enumerated powers was left to the people in the states, and they knew that wouldn’t last. Remember what Franklin said. “What’d you give us?” And he said, “We gave you a republic Constitution if you can keep it.” All right?

                                    The question is, I think without a doubt our founders would have been disappointed that we hadn’t used this before now. Everything that is … And we are trying to restore. We’re not trying to rebuild, we’re not trying to change. We’re trying to restore the Constitution to its original intent as far as commerce clause, in terms of limited government, in terms of restoring the liberty and freedom of people.

                                    And the real question comes down to this: who decides in our country? Whether you’re in North Carolina like where I’m sitting today, or if you’re in Oklahoma or New York or Cali, who decides? Is it a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington, or nine judges on the Supreme Court? Or should it be as our founders intended? Outside of the enumerated powers, it should be we the people deciding in our own states. Remember, their whole idea of creating the House and the Senate differently was so that populism could not be just the thing that ruled everything, that you’d have structure and it would continue.

                                    So, our whole goal is three things. One, to restore the limited government. Number two, create financial responsibility within the federal government because everybody knows there’s none. And then, put term limits on both elected and appointed officials. And that happens through a process called aggregation of 34 states. The Constitution requires two-thirds of the states to ask for a convention of the states to offer amendments to the Constitution, but they have to aggregate. They have to be the same. So, there’s 4, almost 500 applications and sitting in Washington to this day, but they don’t aggravate.

                                    And what we’re doing is building a grassroots army. We’re now close to 4 million people across this country pushing to get an amendments convention that will force a balanced budget amendment, force general accepted accounting principles, forced transparency, and restore the commerce clause, general welfare clause, and necessary and proper clause, which will limit the scope and jurisdiction of the federal government in terms of telling the states what they can and can’t do. And we’re not talking about civil rights or individual rights. We’re talking about preserving them, not limiting them. And then, finally, putting limits on the terms of people who are appointed or elected [crosstalk 00:12:56]-

Sam Rohrer:                  Which, Tom, which is something I can interject before Gary asks you a question.

Tom Coburn:                 Sure.

Sam Rohrer:                  That’s one of the things that you did. The reason you’re not in the Senate right now is that you self-imposed a term limit restriction on you. And I asked you before the program went on, do you think that that was an important thing to do? And let me ask you publicly, was that important to do that?

Tom Coburn:                 Sure. Absolutely. Because what it does is, you put limits on yourself, and it keeps you thinking about why you’re there. Why was I there? I was there to reinforce the constitutional principles that I was taught. And I wasn’t there to get re-elected, and I wasn’t there to become a leader in the leadership of the Republican party. I was there to uphold the Constitution and do what is in the best long-term interest of our country, not what was politically expedient for me.

Gary Dull:                     Yeah. And you know, that’s the oath that you took, correct?

Tom Coburn:                 Absolutely.

Gary Dull:                     To uphold the Constitution, not to do something to get re-elected down the road a little bit. And it seems as though there are so many in Washington, as well as in the states, who forget that. I liked the statement that you made a moment ago, Senator, and that is that your goal is to restore to the original intent of our Constitution and that is needed. And I know here at the Stand in the Gap radio, we give a hearty amen to that.

                                    But a lot of work has been done down through the years to attempt to encourage states and the American people to pursue this idea of a convention of states. And do you say that there are 15 states already lined up and you need 34? Is that correct?

Tom Coburn:                 Yes, sir. We have 15. I think we’re going to get North Carolina this year as well.

Gary Dull:                     Okay.

Tom Coburn:                 So, we’ll be at 16.

Gary Dull:                     Okay. And how is this process coming along? I mean, can you predict at all when you think that that number 34 might come along as you look ahead a little bit?

Tom Coburn:                 Oh, you know, like anybody, it would be a guess. What we do is, we target certain states, and we put resources in, and we build the grassroots in those states. And then, we go around and talk to legislative leaders and members in those states and try to build the effort through the constituents of that state. You know, on average, 65% of the people in North Carolina want this to happen, for example. That’s where I sit today. 52% of the Democrats do. So, this is a majority opinion where you can bring Democrats and Republicans together and say, “Don’t you really want to start making the decisions here instead of having somebody at the Department of Education or Transportation telling you what to do?”

                                    And so, we see some common ground. But what we do is, we target. So could I give you an estimate? Yeah. Four or six years from now, we should have the 34 states and already be through convention, and have the states take their seven years to decide what they’re going to do with it.

Dave Kistler:                 Senator Coburn, it is a delight to have you on. In fact, segment one was a walk through history, and I loved every bit of it. And thank you so much for all the work you’ve put in. Let me ask you this. Getting two-thirds of the states to agree on something is a very difficult procedure, to be sure. So, my question is, what’s the primary motivation for these states coming together? I mean, is it political alignment, red states versus blue states? Is it issue-driven, like the issue of abortion or something like that? Or is it state sovereignty that’s driving these states to be interested in a convention of states?

Tom Coburn:                 Well, you know, I don’t think it’s issue-driven as much as returning the decision making and the power back to states that the government has usurped. When I talk to legislators of both party, they don’t like … Unless they’re of the new ilk of the socialist ilk that’s rising today, they don’t like the fact that federal government tells them what to do and when to do it. And when I say federal government, I’m talking about unelected bureaucrats or judges who were unelected but appointed and have decided that they’ll create the Constitution they want rather than follow the one our founders gave us.

                                    So, you know, I think there’s a mix in certain states, you know? In Utah, we had four or five Democratic senators that have voted with us. So, it’s bipartisan in certain states. In other states, it’s really issue-driven. Some states, especially like Massachusetts and New York and Vermont, they believe in socialism. They believe that government ought to make all the decisions for you. I mean, that’s ingrained in what they believe. They don’t believe in our Constitution, but they believe in that. And you know, that’s what our founders said. If your state wants to do those kinds of things, you can, as long as you don’t violate this one Constitution. But we’ve lost the ability to make those separate and fair decisions in the state.

Sam Rohrer:                  Tom, I want to ask you a question right now. We may have to drag it over into the next section, but I want to ask you this. Because after having been in the legislature like I was in Pennsylvania for a long time, I would say that most, yes, agree. We don’t like Washington telling us what to do. But I want to go here and ask you this. In the end of the day, has the federal government actually taken power from the states, or have the states over time actually given it up?

Tom Coburn:                 Two answers very quickly. One, with the 17th amendment, where we gave the right to elect senators instead of having the state houses control who their senator was, we lost tremendous amounts of power. Because no longer was the senator loyal to the legislature and their state, now they’re loyal to get themselves getting re-elected. So, you totally undermined your own ability to influence the Senate.

                                    The Senate was designed by our founders to put a brake on expanding government, and-

Sam Rohrer:                  I didn’t know exactly what you were going to say. We got to break, but I thought that’s what you would say.

                                    Let’s go back into it right now. A convention of states, and we’re talking about a constitutional firewall. You know, from the beginning of our nation, the founders understood the principle that we started first as sovereign, individual states. Then, along came the United States, but that was a small letter. Not a capital U, a small letter. That was like “united States of America.” We’ve kind of tended to lose that. The federal government, becoming the authority that could do for the nation what the individual states could not do on their own, was the purpose. But it was never the intent that the federal government would end up usurping, stealing from, bribing away, or however you want to look at it, the individual states’ authority. Yet, we’ve now gone to that point, and that’s really where we have the issue now.

                                    So now we sit here where our states beg for federal dollars. They beg for federal bail outs. And we’ve given up so much autonomy that most states, many states, sit fairly impotent on most matters of real importance. Now, into that scenario walks now all of these candidates, the leftist candidates who are out there, actually arrogantly talking about socialism, and why we need more federal government spending, and more involvement. All the reason why now this provision, Constitution pulls out Article Five of the convention of the states, is there.

                                    Now, Senator Coburn, Dr. Coburn, I’ve really appreciated you being on the program today. You’re such a wealth of information. Let’s go directly here. You’ve already mentioned, we’ve talked about it. There’s a shocking chorus, rising course of actually using the word socialism. Unbelievable, and talking about that. Why do you believe that a constitutional convention, as we’re talking about it, is the strongest firewall perhaps against those who would love to see socialism embedded further into the structure of American government?

Tom Coburn:                 Well, first of all, let me correct your language a little bit.

Sam Rohrer:                  Okay.

Tom Coburn:                 You cannot in this country have a constitutional convention. You can only have an amendments convention.

Sam Rohrer:                  Thank you for clarifying that very much.

Tom Coburn:                 Because that’s very important, because the big [inaudible 00:21:22] that we have is that, “Oh, this can’t … You’ll lose control. We’ll lose all our rights.” The fact is, is if we allow the federal government to continue to grow and run all over us the way we are today, and you allow the socialists that are coming to run over us, you’ll lose your rights. So, the answer our founders gave us was this Article Five convention of amendments. So, why is this the answer? Is it because we have every intent to restore the balance of power? For we’re not a people that … Remember, the federal government was created by the states. The federal government didn’t create the states. The states created the federal government. And we the people are the ones that determine the powers of the federal government.

                                    And now that it’s been abused and expanded, and through Supreme Court decisions undermined a lot of the balance of power between the branches of the federal government, it’s entirely important and appropriate that we call a convention to force the federal government back into the box that it’s supposed to be rather than to succumb to what we’re hearing from the left that the federal government knows better. That you don’t need the freedom to make decisions for you and your family; that the federal government can do it for you.

                                    So, if in fact you will love freedom, you will love what we’re doing. Because what we’re going to do is enhance your freedom, and we’re going to move decision making. The real question is this: who decides in America? Who decides in Oklahoma how we build our highways? Is it some real, educated person sitting in an office in Washington, DC that raises the cost of a highway 50%? Or is it the smart engineers and highway people that we have in Oklahoma that know how to build highways? And because of all the rules and regulations, when we go to build one with the tax money that we sent to Washington and get back, we have to pay 50% more to build one.

                                    So, this is about liberty. This is about freedom. And you’re either for liberty and for freedom, or you’re for elitism, or you have the elites telling us what to do and how to do it. And that’s a loss of freedom. That’s a loss of liberty. The Article Five convention of the states has no risk of running away other than to address the three areas that I talked about. And it has every bit of the power to restore limitations and rebalance the three branches of the federal government. And they’re not imbalanced today. The Supreme Court wasn’t intended to make all these decisions that these judges are making because they don’t like something, and they’re supposed to be interpreting the Constitution as it is written, not what they’d like to see.

Sam Rohrer:                  Doctor-

Tom Coburn:                 So, my hope is, is that your listeners will understand this and contact their legislatures and say, “We want you to pass this to restore the balance and move more decision making back to the states.”

Dave Kistler:                 Dr. Coburn, all of this makes perfect sense to me. What you’ve just said has touched on fairly significantly a portion of the question I want to ask you, but I want to drill down on this because I have had lengthy conversations with people, and here’s where everybody goes that fears … And I’m gonna use that word. They fear a convention of states because they fear it could get out of control. And here’s the argument they advance. What about states like New York, or what about these left-leaning states that already defy and despise the Constitution as it is? If you open up an amendments convention or a convention of states, it could get out of control and we could have worse problems, more socialistic thought than less. Again, you’ve already touched on it, but drill down there to answer those concerns so that people have that alleviated right here at the very outset.

Tom Coburn:                 Okay. Historical court precedents you cannot offer an amendment outside that applied for in an amendments convention. All right? So, we’re talking about fiscal priorities and fiscal. So, you can’t offer amendment that says the federal government’s going to take away your Second Amendment rights or your First Amendment rights. It will be deemed non-Germane. So, that can’t happen. And even if they override with … Two-thirds of the states would have to override that. It’ll never get sent to the states because the Congress will be forbidden for sending an amendment that wasn’t within the purview of the application.

                                    You touched on it. Here’s the real thing. People have more fear than they have courage. And that’s why part of the reason we’re failing as a country is because they won’t stand up when they know what’s wrong because they’re fearful. And our country was built on courage, and faith, and truth, and wisdom, not on cowardice, fear, and incompetence. So let me make that [crosstalk 00:26:17]-

Dave Kistler:                 That is well said.

Tom Coburn:                 The second point I would make is even if something got out of control and it was sent to the states, all it takes is 13 judiciary chairmen of either a Senate or a House in 13 different states to stop anything. And I’ve been in 42 states in the last five years. And none of that’s going to happen, because you know what? Most of the state legislature, and even in some of the crazy wacky states, they don’t want the federal government to tell them everything. So, there’s a lot of patriots all across most of these legislatures, even though their state may want to do that, and maybe some in their state houses want the federal government’s control, it isn’t going to happen. It’s an impossibility. So again-

Dave Kistler:                 Senator Coburn, I’m going to step-

Tom Coburn:                 Okay.

Dave Kistler:                 I’m just going to say, I’m going to step in here quickly if I may, because we’re about out of time in this segment. But in your opinion, what can the average person do to facilitate an orderly constitutional effort to curb the excess of the federal government? I can hear people out there saying, “What can I do? What can the average Joe America do to help us on this process?

Tom Coburn:                 Well, the average Joe America smiles when I tell them about Article Five, amendments convention. They say, “Really? That’s in there? We can do this?” And all of a sudden, they say, “Yeah.” So, here’s what the average American to do. They can go to Read the stuff. It takes you about 40 minutes to read everything that we’re doing and why, and there’s tons more in there. And then, write a personal letter to your state legislator and say, “Please support this. Please return the balance of power. Please keep and ensure our liberty and our rights. Please don’t let the federal government mortgage my kid’s future anymore.”

Dave Kistler:                 Dr. Coburn, give that website one more time, please.

Tom Coburn:       

Sam Rohrer:                  Whether constitutional firewalls can be erected to further protect the erosion of our constitutional rights, such as the convention of states as formulated by Article Five of the US Constitution, that which we’re talking about today … Whether that as an approach, that firewall can be erected, or, where we often talk about is the appointment of more pro-life and more constitutional judges as a firewall, or, perhaps electing more conservative members of the House and Senate. All of which are important. But none of these do we really know how they will ultimately come out.

                                    Now, in the end, all of those efforts that I just mentioned and others I think are very important, and they need to be pursued. But in reality, there’s a more fundamental effort that must be pursued, I believe. And that is what’s at the heart of the mission of the American Pastors Network, our Stand in the Gap radio and TV programs, and the things that we talk about regularly on this program. And that’s the re-identification and the re-embracing of a Biblical worldview, which is foundational because it underpins the US Constitution that contains this Article Five, and goes to the heart of what Dr. Coburn was talking about, what the founders were talking about, and his reference to Benjamin Franklin years ago in Philadelphia, who said, “We’ve given you a republic if you can keep it.” Keep it based on what?

                                    Well, that’s what we’re going to talk about right now. Those underpinnings of liberty and freedom, those understandings that gave and made us a shining city on a hill, that gave us the Constitution that says God created, gave us unalienable rights, and then went through the process of then bringing forth what we have in this country today. Those are not accidental things, yet I think we live in a day when a lot of those things are believed to be accidental and chance. They’re not chance. Our freedom is not chance.

                                    Dave, I want to go to you right now and ask you for your opinion expanding a couple of things here. Because yesterday on this program, you led the program. Our discussion really centered around the primal role of the Bible in our nation’s founding. And we were talking about the fact that the Bible verses are all over our buildings. You cannot get away from Bible references and principals. Even the early New England primer that taught her children how to read was all based around Bible verses and associating every letter of the alphabet to a very important verse of scripture that started with that letter, perhaps, of the alphabet.

                                    But on the program yesterday, I know when you asked me a question, I mentioned about the statement of William Penn here in Pennsylvania where he called us a “holy experiment.” Other founders referenced it, and I said this. He made a statement that you cannot keep … At this point, it was before Benjamin Franklin ever made his comment because he preceded Franklin by about a hundred years. But Penn made a statement that, “We could not have a self-governing republic, a free republic, a free form of government unless people voluntarily submitted themselves to the Ten Commandments of God.” Those were exactly his words. And then, other founders later picked it up and said the same thing.

                                    I want to ask you, Dave. Why is the voluntary submission to God and His law, Ten Commandments in particular, so essential? And why is it in reality the ultimate firewall against socialism, globalism, humanism, all of those things out there that we identify as being enemies of freedom? What would you say?

Dave Kistler:                 Well, Sam, our founders believed in a thing called self-government, and self-government starts with governing one’s own self with respect to their passions. It was D.L. Moody that said it I think as well as it can be said. He said, “The only person safe outside the sight of a policeman is the individual who carries his policeman with him. And that policeman is called character; a character dictated by Biblical principles.” If a guy cannot say no to his own appetites of his flesh and govern himself there, which we’re incapable of doing apart from God’s word being a part of our life, then we’re not going to discipline ourselves and say no when it comes to federal spending.

                                    So, all of this goes back to a Biblical foundation, and our founders understood this. That’s why all these verses and all these principles were so thoroughly inculcated into our founding documents. That’s why the verses of scripture are on the buildings in Washington, DC. They understood that government of the people, by the people, for the people starts with the most basic form of self-government. And that is a character dictated by the truth of God’s word. Apart from that, Sam, this entire experiment, as William Penn called it, will fail in a colossal way. With the Bible, it can succeed royally.

Sam Rohrer:                  Gary, let me go to you, because what Dave just said is really very, very clear. I want to go to you now, Gary, and ask you this question. The founders in the Declaration of Independence at the end of the document mean they recognized God as creator and rights coming from Him: life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, private property, things we’ve talked about many times in the program. But at the end of the document, they appealed to the great judge of the universe to hear the rectitude or the rightness of their plea.

                                    Now, I want to go to that from the standpoint of God as judge and connect it to accountability, and how that understanding of God and that accountability is so critical for helping a person to keep their choices, their actions, be they a citizen or somebody in office, keeping their actions in check. Speak to that, please.

Gary Dull:                     Well, that’s very, very true. We need to recognize that we are all going to give an account unto God. The Bible teaches that both in the Old Testament and the New Testament. And I think, Sam, you are referring to that last sentence, at least, where it says, “And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.” We need to get back to two things. Number one, recognizing that God is in control. And number two, we need to be willing to pledge to each other the principles upon which this nation was founded.

                                    You know, Sam, I don’t know if you’ve ever run into this or not, but in discussing the Constitution with a lot of the liberals today, a lot of the progressives, when you bring up the concept of the original intent, we need to get back to the original intent, that brings fear into them because they don’t want the original content of our Constitution. They want to change it to meet their liberal thoughts today. And you know, we need to try, I think, as individuals to recognize it. If our Constitution is going to work to continue to strengthen our nation, we need to go back to that original intent in every element of that great document that God’s given us.

Sam Rohrer:                  And Gary and Dave, that great document that we’re talking about, ladies and gentlemen, that Declaration of Independence, its predecessor, the organic document of law Mayflower Compact that recognizes God, to the Constitution that embodies this Article Five envisioned by our founders as perhaps an emergency reset button for a future America, now us … All of those things all start with the fact that authority in government is God’s idea. The family is God’s idea. The individual is God’s idea. The church is God’s idea, and He lays it all out on the pages of scripture, and He prescribes their duties, their role, their levels of accountability, and how they relate to each other. That’s what the founders understood. That’s what they built into the Constitution, and that’s why Franklin said in Philadelphia, “You’ve gotten a republic,” this holy experiment that Penn said here in Pennsylvania, “if you can keep it.”

                                    We can’t keep what we have, ladies and gentlemen, by any convention, by any conference, by any law. We keep it when we ourselves, all of us, submit ourselves to God’s law and recognize that all we have came from Him.