Chris Grieb Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Earlier this week the Kennedy Center announced their honors for this year. The honors will be given out in December and the day after Christmas will be shown on TV. About the same time the Presidential Medal of Freedom will be given in a ceremony at the White House. Should the United States government be doing this? If you look at your US Constitution there is a provision against granting titles of nobility. Are these two awards a violation of that provision. It is true that no monetary award comes with the medal. But is the certification that one person's achievements are a violation of at least the spirit of that article. I hope the readers of OL will think about this issue and give me their ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Earlier this week the Kennedy Center announced their honors for this year. The honors will be given out in December and the day after Christmas will be shown on TV. About the same time the Presidential Medal of Freedom will be given in a ceremony at the White House. Should the United States government be doing this? If you look at your US Constitution there is a provision against granting titles of nobility. Are these two awards a violation of that provision. It is true that no monetary award comes with the medal. But is the certification that one person's achievements are a violation of at least the spirit of that article. I hope the readers of OL will think about this issue and give me their ideas.I don't think there is a problem. At the time, a title of nobility, came with special legal privileges. If you recall, at the time of the Constitution, the U.S. had recently fought a war to do away with the monarchical system with its lords, ladies and titles. The Medal of Freedom bestows no special legal standing or privilege. All it is, is a recognition of achievement. No harm done.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Chris,I agree with Bob. Titles of nobility were used to denote lifetime governmental power. The very spirit of the founding fathers was that governmental power is to be temporary in the life of any one person.Probably the closest thing we have to a title of nobility is "Your Honor" for a judge with a lifetime appointment.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Grieb Posted September 13, 2007 Author Share Posted September 13, 2007 Michael; We are now referring to former President with the title President. Also all officer holders are referring to as Honorable.I have always thought the best treatment of a hero is in the movie Sergeant York and when York has returned from the war he finds that his Tennessee neighbors have given the land he has always wanted. I believe our monuments should be raised not by taxes but by voluntary contributions. The greatest of our citizens will receive their honors with public acclaim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Chris,From what I gather in the American sense of life, these titles are allowed in a spirit of benevolence and recognition. If something drastic ever needs to be done to remove them (like what happened in removing prayer from schools), I have no doubt it will be done. I do not see anything in American life like title of nobility as it was used in the lands of kings, coming with royal privileges by birth or decree from a king.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggrad02 Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 This biggest problem that I have with this, is that there is nothing in the Constitution that says the federal government should be spending money to give awards. --Dustan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Grieb Posted September 19, 2007 Author Share Posted September 19, 2007 I think a strict constitutionalist would not approve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 This biggest problem that I have with this, is that there is nothing in the Constitution that says the federal government should be spending money to give awards. --DustanHow about military decorations? Congress is authorized to fund an army and running an army usual entiails decorations for extraordinary or heroic doings.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Grieb Posted September 19, 2007 Author Share Posted September 19, 2007 I don't have a problem with military decorations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggrad02 Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 I think you answered it in your post. Military Decorations are part of military spending, just like military uniforms are, or m16's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now