Archive for Individual Rights
I stumbled across the steubenvillefiles, and it’s horrific and sickening if true. Justice must prevail here.
This is not what high school kids “do.”
If true, this is obscene and destructive behavior that, apparently, some high school students who attended a government school engaged in. It’s sick, and is a reflection of not only their character but that of an environment in which they were raised that did not inculcate any shred of individual rights, morality, or even plain decency.
If true, all I can say is shame. Shame, shame, shame.
. . . for it is there you will find your future, if you want one.
And the key for the future of the GOP, IMHO, is to drop the social issues as a principal means to their political ends. It will be difficult, but it is critical. The party is simply on the wrong side of time by clinging overtly to deeply divisive issues such as an abortion litmus test (all too often manifesting as militantly pro-life), anti-gay marriage, and overt religiosity. If they continue down those premises it will go worse for them as time goes along. Those are the actual core reasons why the GOP has lost ground..
This isn’t to suggest they should do a 180 and take the opposite by becoming overtly pro-abortion, pro gay marraige, and reject religion. But there is a third way, and I see it as the only way. There are core themes that can draw together libertarians, Christian conservatives, free thinkers, and economically astute social liberals. Chief among them are: lowered taxes, limited (efficient) government, market premised economics (a separation of economics and state), less regulation, and an overt support of individual rights and personal freedom. In short, the idea ought to be: whatever your moral premise may be, whatever your religion (or not), there are things we all can and should agree upon so that we are free to exercise our individual religious freedoms and personal preferences in a country that is prosperous while respecting and promoting the rule of law. We need to renew the principle of the government as logically subordinated to the individual – it now vice versa, supported all too often by the GOP, and is the operating premise of the Left. If the GOP were to go down that path, I guarantee you it would win a lot of elections down the road. It is, essentially, an end run around the Left whose premise is ideologically based upon subordinating the individual TO the state. The new GOP would remove the Left’s makeup and reveal them for what they really are: controlling and vindictive.
The GOP would first and foremost win minds, and then hearts.
When the Whigs, Free Soilers, and Abolitionists emerged from Ripon they had various individual beliefs and positions, but they all agreed that that free men on free soil comprised a morally and economically superior system to slavery. The GOP of today would be well advised to wrap their arms around that simple idea and portray what the left has inculcated as policy (taxation, regulations, educational monopolies, controlled economics) as slavery. The GOP, of all parties, should be the champions of individual rights – not the bedroom window peaking party they are perceived as and portrayed as by the left and much of the center in America today.
Lincoln left the Whig party principally because of the slavery issue, and was a man without a party until the GOP emerged with a single minded purpose. When they lost their political power to Roosevelt’s new deal, it was eerily similar to what we’re living through now. Of course, the inception of the GOP was heavily influenced by the Free Soiler movement and anti-slavery, but it also advocated for a modernized economy. Well, that sounds like individual rights and free market capitalism to me today! The GOP would be well advised to look deep into their own history and see that free men and free minds were really at the core of its initial appeal, and could be again provided they stop proselytizing and started thinking in terms of individual rights as envisioned by crazy lunatics such as Thomas Jefferson ;> (who, sadly, could not even be welcomed into, let alone a nominee of, the GOP of today – he wasn’t an evangelical Christian, he was a free thinker).
So, when the left characterizes Republicans as Neanderthals this is what they are referring to. Where in this interview do you hear any scintilla of sense towards the foundational premise of America, individual rights.
Washington Post reporter Ann Gerhart said it best: “If this is a legitimate election, the female body politic has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. ”
h/t to The Washington Post
– last one out, please shut off the lights.
What is wrong with you people across the St Croix? How can you possibly continue to (or, in the first place) elect this evangelical nut-job / national embarrassment to the United States Congress? I honestly don’t understand this, but then again I have a very hard time with people who “lure” their children into buildings where they worship the supernatural..but I digress.
Michelle Bachmann is at it again with this outrageous letter to the State Department’s Deputy Inspector General; the GOP will absolutely lose the election in November BECAUSE of these religious/mentally ill movers and shakers in their ranks. Hell, the party is composed of evangelical nut cases. The fact that people actually think this woman is sane is stunning, but to purposefully send her money and also to vote for her is testimony to the irrationality that runs rampant in America. Here’s the point of this folks, she does these things BECAUSE OF HER RELIGION and not because of a love of country. She doesn’t see America as the land of enlightenment, individual rights, and freedom. She sees America as a Christian nation. She represents the absolute worst in an elected individual because she covertly and overtly pushes for a Christian theocracy.
Extremist antiabortion activists have, sadly, achieved a series of victories in their efforts to ban by the force of armed government thugs the procedure. This assault is a major threat to women’s right to abortion, but profoundly individual rights. To the extent any specific individual rights (such as a woman’s right to an abortion) are threatened, all are threatened. The antiabortion extremists’ war on a woman’s right to her own body is an unseemly and irrational assault on all of our rights – property, free trade, and freedom of speech.
In a great move to raise a middle finger to some of these right wing, evangelical nut-jobs who promote antiabortion extremism New York’s Mayor Bloomberg is pledging money to Planned Parenthood to offset funds that were cut by the Susan G. Komen for the Cure breast cancer foundation.
While the storyline is essentially about women’s access to breast cancer screening, it clearly demonstrates a larger issue related to abortion rights.. Don’t always agree with Michael Bloomberg, but on this one I applaud him heartily!!
For a comprehensive, rational, individual rights based view of how to properly think about abortion rights, please read this great paper
Only in evangelical nut-job-land, aka Iowa, could a meat head the likes of Rick Santorum almost pull out a victory. This is the same holier than thou jerk-off who supported Arlen Specter, voted for massive amounts of earmarks, not to mention foreign aid up the a$$, and got his butt kicked in his last run for US Senate. There is only one reason why he was able to cobble together a 25% showing. He ran around in all of the little evangelical towns in central Iowa and pandered to the mystics there. It was actually Huckabee, part II.
So, what’s so bad about Ricky boy? Simple, Santorum denounces individualism, bastardizes the vision of America’s founding, and to top it off disassociates with any proper conceptualization of individual rights – the real and true basis of America’s founding. All the while wanting people to think his twisted theocratic vision is all part of the “founding vision” of America. This is called steps toward theocracy, make no mistake about it.
RS: “the conservative view of freedom,” “the liberty our Founders understood. . . this is freedom coupled with the responsibility to something bigger or higher than the self.” “True liberty is freedom in the service of virtue–not the freedom to be as selfish as I want to be, or the freedom to be left alone, but the freedom to attend to one’s duties–duties to God, to family, and to neighbors. . . . In the conservative vision, people are first connected to and part of families: The family, not the individual, is the fundamental unit of society.”
Such utterances are wholly incompatible with individual rights. Santorum, you are a bizarre mystic ass – please, just go away.
I witnessed Tim Pawlenty on Morning Joe today.. He was getting grilled on foreign policy matters, particularly our ongoing waste of time, money and American lives in Afghanistan.
Pawlenty has some intrinsic problems that will prevent him from becoming the next President of The United States. Here are just four to consider..
1. He is an unapologetic evangelical Christian (he passes the GOP pro-life, Christian litmus test).
2. His foriegn policy prescriptions are fundamentally premised on U.S. interventionism as a force for good in the world.
3. He believes in the power of government, in general, as a force of good.
4. He is from South Saint Paul.
The American people, it seems to me, are sick and tired of these religious politicians using their elected positions to shove their mystic creed down our throats. His subsumes sacrifice as a virtue, and therefore will apply that in all of his policy and decision making. It’s profoundly sickening, immoral, and disgraceful.
The answer to Afghanistan, and all other international military-esque issues, is that we need a far more lethal, but far smaller, military that is not premised on being based all over the world. Pull out, and stay out. Generals are now like lawyers, there is a legitimate need for good ones, but we clearly have way too many at present.. If we are attacked or directly threatened, respond directly. We do not need bases of operation all over the world “just in case” we think a threat could be looming.
Lastly, government is a necessary evil, and it must be limited to the protection of individual rights, period. It is not a force for good any more than Yellowstone National Park is a force for good.
Pawlenty suffers from the same mystic megalomania that has gripped GOP candidates and office holders forever: we’re better than the other guy because we’re Christian pro lifers who know, in our hearts, what’s best for you. And since we came from humble beginnings, all the better (as if being poor at some point in your life has some inherent virtue that makes you more qualified than the product of a financial success story).
Pawlenty is a holier than thou, statist, self-sacrifice spewing, candidate without any rightful claim to power.
Secessionists control the majority and vow to hold a vote on separation from the national government. Such a headline must sound like the dream of racists or the people of some African country few could pronounce or even locate.
But the thirst for liberty crosses all boundaries. People seeking to be free from tyrannical governments that oppress individual rights and free markets only hate the intrusions of the bureaucracy.
The next secessionist movement may surprise you.
In case you had not realized it, the tax filing deadline of April 15th has been shoved to April 18th for the Washinton D.C. celebration of Emancipation Day. This April marks the 150th anniversary of the beginning of the War Between the States ( despite the history books it was not a war about the overthrow of the government in Washington D.C.). Of course this year’s celebration has nothing to do with the South’s attempt at freedom from the over reaching federal government and the tyrant Lincoln.
Washinton D.C. historians rarely get events correct. The revered emancipation only pertained to slaves held in rebellious territories. The slaves in the North and a few places in the South that did rebel were not part of the deal. What do details matter when the non-working federal workers get another day off on our dime.
Tonoght’s Sunday Night Snippet ponders the question of Southern independence if the states in rebellion had done a few things differently. Read More→
The reality is clear, the delusions rampant. At the end of the day, you must pick one or the other for, as Dr. Hsieh adeptly puts it: “ultimately these two cannot be reconciled, one or the other has to go..” Unless, of course, you prefer to live as a self-deluded hypocrit.. which pretty much describes the Republican Party in its current manifestation… As well as the secular left.
Which brings up one of the key points in Dr Hsieh’s podcast. That being if you are a committed Christian your political home is not with the Republicans, but rather and clearly with the Democrats. Democrats who morally defend their collectivist actions and programs (such as, and rather profoundly, the protestors who were arguing “tax the rich”) by an appeal to their Christian ethics actually have the high ground, Republicans who argue the opposite for reasons of long range planning, free markets in education, etc., simply have no moral argument – theirs is full-on subjectivity. Unless, of course, they have a morality premised not on Christianity, but rather individual rights: rational self-interest.
Make your choice, you have no other… and your time is running out.
Dr Diana Hsieh’s Noodlecast (Episode #62: Rationally Selfish Webcast – excerpt on Capitalism v Christianity).
“If recycling is worth doing, it should be paying for itself without a state government subsidy, or, if not, let local communities decide if they want to cough up the money to do it anyway. It’s time for decentralization, efficiency, realism… not fluffy-headed idealism. Saving money is the morality we need, not posing as good people by doing something if it actually makes no sense. I’m for pragmatism, not narcissism.”
Well put Ann. However, rational self-interest is the real morality we need; “saving money” may be a virtue, but it is not a morality.
Better stated: I’m for rational self-interest premised upon individual rights, not narcissism.