Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Random Thoughts

By Michael David Rawlings

Those who believe that extending civil rights protections on the basis of sexual behavior contrary to the designs of nature constitutes liberty are thoughtless slogan eaters. Civil rights protections are collectivistic in nature and are exerted against liberty's preeminent concerns of private property and free association. The sanctity of human life and the family of nature—the first principles of private property—are the only legitimate basis on which the government may exert civil rights protections beyond those associated with the franchise.

Legislation that supports parental authority in commerce is not the stuff of a nanny state. Both natural and constitutional law underscore the reality that a society in which minors wield the political rights of adults cannot be free. Minors are not free to buy and sell as they please. This is not merely for their protection. Ultimately, it goes to the concerns of private property and free association associated with parental authority against the usurpations of strangers.

To understand the Founders is to understand the classical liberalism of the Anglo-American tradition predicated on the Lockean political theory of natural law as summarized, for example, in the Declaration of Independence. Every freedom loving person should be steeped in the Two Treatises of Government by John Locke. In today's political parlance, think a synthesis of "Tea Party" conservatism and libertarianism, sans the latter's tendency to recklessly disregard the first principles of private property, i.e., the sanctity of human life and the official approbation of the biological family of nature. This model was extrapolated from the sociopolitical ramifications of Judeo-Christianity's ethical system of thought. It is the nearest thing to perfect liberty and justice attainable in this world.

The natural law of the Anglo-American tradition presupposes the God of nature. The God of nature, not the State, is the Source and Guarantor of fundamental human rights. Further, it asserts that the sanctity of human life and the security of private property, backed by an armed citizenry, comprise the foundation of all subsequent political rights.

The Anglo-American tradition of classical liberalism does not recognize any equivalency between the prospect of the State compelling one to support the life and welfare of another to whom one bears no direct responsibility and the prospect of preserving the life of nature's unborn children. The impositions of the former are outrageous. The impositions of the latter are obligatory. Beyond those rights inherent to the self-evidentiary demands of self-preservation, necessity and virtue, there is no inherent right of abortion for the sake of convenience.

The leftist imagines boogiemen lurking behind every tree, under every rock and around every corner where none exist; he is determined to enslave us all in his futile effort to exorcise them.

Of course, Lefty is a statist bootlick, but the reason he deplores the liberty of free association is because he is terrified of it. He knows that his collectivist claptrap cannot compete in a truly free and open society, so he cheats and steals and lies his way along, using the judiciary, for example, as a means of maintaining a monopolistic stranglehold on the public education system in direct violation of natural and constitutional law. In other words, he's a coward at heart and a fascist by default.

Teachers are not underpaid by taxpayers; taxpayers are underserved by teachers.

No comments: