Questions about certain American Freedoms

[Esjay]

The RLC platform noted and I have a couple of questions.

[Esjay]

My concept of the RLC when I joined in 2000 was that issues like Abortion and Gay rights were protected. My association with Free Republic has shown that neither of these issues should be ignored by the Federal Government. Can somebody please clear this up for me?

[KrisKrinkle]

The following is overly brief.  Much more can (and quite possibly will be) written about it:

First, from the Declaration Of Independence:

a. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”
b. “That to secure these rights, Governments are  instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,”
c. “He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.”

Most people remember the quote at “a” and fail to remember the quotes at “b” and “c” and all they might entail.

Second, an old saying:

“Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.”

This demonstrates that one person’s rights end where another person’s rights begin.  Of course opinions frequently differ as to where one person’s rights end and those of another begin.  Such conflicts of rights are resolved by superior force.   Absent an organized society, they are resolved more or less on the spot and in accordance with the will of the person who can bring the superior force to bear.

In an organized society, such conflicts of rights may be resolved on the spot or later in accordance with the laws or customs of the particular society.  (Of course this is still in accordance with the will of the person who can bring the superior force to bear because that force includes the resources of the society.  But that person’s will by itself is not enough. )

Third, from the Letter of the President of the Federal Convention, Dated September17, 1787, to the President of Congress, Transmitting the Constitution:

“Individuals entering into society, must give up a share of liberty to preserve the rest.”  (Warning, this is out of context.)

So,  “opinions frequently differ as to where one person’s rights end and those of another begin” in regard to Abortion and Gay rights.  This results in a real or perceived conflict of rights.  We have a Government instituted to secure rights and we expect laws for the public good.  As part of giving up a share of liberty, we turn to the government to resolve conflicts of rights through the rule of law and governmental/societal force rather than acting on individual will and using individual force.  The Federal Government is involved because one of the things “Governments are instituted among Men” to secure rights from is other governments and those involved (on either side) do not believe local governments are upholding their rights.
 

[jackbob]

I do not want to add, or take anything away from KrisKrinkle's most excellent reply, but I am curious as to how your "association with Free Republic has shown that neither of these issues should be ignored by the Federal Government." Of course if what you meant was that you were not aware that the federal government was already involved in both issues, and thereby should not ignore either, then I think understand how FR may have changed your mind.

Just curious.

[NMC EXP]

My concept of the RLC when I joined in 2000 was that issues like Abortion and Gay rights were protected

Define "protected".

Regards

J.R.

[kjvail]

that issues like Abortion and Gay rights were protected


Abortion is not a RIGHT - in fact what conservatives believe in is to protect the clear right of the unborn child not to be murdered.
As for gay 'rights' thats a bit more complicated question and would take much longer to explain.

[vetman]

Agreed. To enjoy freedom, one must be willing to accept the responsibility that comes with that freedom. I lost a brother to the so called right of abortion. Stupid isn't it? I pray that this does not happen to others as well.