God-given Rights, Man-made Anti-rights, and why “Safety Nets” are Immoral

The Coach's Team ^ | 8/23/16 | Publius Huldah

[Oldpuppymax]

It is the dogma of our time that proponents of government “safety net” programs hold the so-called moral high ground. Accordingly, progressives preen over their own “compassion;” and many who pretend to be conservatives chime in that they too “believe in safety net programs.”

But safety net programs are unconstitutional and immoral. They are unconstitutional because “charity” is not one of the enumerated powers of the federal government.1 They are immoral because they are based on a fabricated system of man-made anti-rights which negate the Natural Rights God gave us.

I. The Origin of Rights and the Purpose of Civil Government: The Declaration of Independence sets forth the Principles which were fleshed out – more or less perfectly – in Our Constitution.

The key is the 2nd paragraph, which begins: “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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That TO SECURE these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it…” (emphasis added)

The Bible explains how we are born with a great many inherent rights such as to earn, keep, and inherit private property; to defend ourselves; to worship God; and to live our lives free from meddling and interference as long as we observe the God-given Rights of others.

But as we know, men are not angels. Evil men seek to take God given Rights away from others as they seek to exercise control over their fellow man.

That is why we need civil government...

[headsonpikes]

Think of barbed-wire fences as ‘safety nets’ for domesticated animals.

[Sergio]

bkmk

[IronJack]

Here is nothing compassionate, generous, or moral about stealing money from one person to aid another. Robin Hood may have been a thief with good intentions, but he was a thief nonetheless.

[teeman8r]

i thought robin hood took back the money the sheriff collected as taxes, and then gave it back to the people... after withholding a small transaction fee of course...

prompting the government to raise taxes to combat the rising crime rate...

it’s always something

[IronJack]

He also robbed churchmen whom he felt had overly indulged themselves at the expense of the long-suffering peasantry. And whether the Sheriff and King John were oppressive is not the point. It would be better for the peasants to rise up and depose their rulers than to rely on the ostensible redistribution of wealth by a self-appointed Justice who, as you point out, kept some small vigorish for himself.