To: dcwusmc
And some good answers. I'll give you the first one (self-defense), I'll take issue with two of them, and you skipped one ("Can I take your money by force and spend it on the defense of our nation?")...
There is NO legitimate authority for government to take private property by force.
To give individuals a superior right to land would be foolish. How can a person be permitted to hold a nation hostage by posessing, for instance, complete ownership of a harbor? or river access? or a mountain pass? The very existence of nations has from time to time throughout history been determined by control of geographic features such as these.
Can the police commandeer a vehicle in an emergency? Do you also have a problem with Amendment III?
I'll grant you that this power has been and continues to be abused. But abuses do not negate principles.
Drafting people into an army is no more or less than government slavery.
But I didn't mention drafting people when I asked, "Can I order you to march into a battle you dont want to fight?" The point I was trying to zero in on is that just as a soldier is a member of a body, so is the citizen of a nation. It's possible for individual liberty to not only conflict with but to endanger the interests of the body. A body of soldiers must act in coordination, and each soldier must subordinate his own interests and sacrifice for a greater purpose than his own, or he puts every other soldier at risk.
Now that's an extreme and dramatic illustration, but it's not an exception. Throughout history societies have, to one degree or another, compelled their member to conform to standards seen as being in the interest of the society. Ours is no different, nor should it be. Though our circumstances permit unprecedented individual freedom (since the risk of nonconformity is unprecedentedly low), not even America can survive total disregard for our society. (Even now we see the effects of loss of cohesion: disputes over language, the laws of foreign religions and customs, etc.)
But more to the point, once a soldier has joined himself to an army, he has ceded the authority to decide when, where and how to fight. And once a person has joined himself to a society, he has signed the social compact and in so doing ceded some of his individual freedom. Not all, but some.
It's possible for this to be abused as well. But again, abuses do not negate principles. (America tends, IMO, to err on the side of permitting too much deviance, leading to, in Sen. Moynihan's phrase, defining deviancy down.)
Once more, here's the question you missed: Can I take your money by force and spend it on the defense of our nation?
244 posted on
08/22/2009 7:04:20 PM PDT by
LearsFool
("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
To: LearsFool
Can you or anyone take my money or property by force in defense of the country? In a word, NO. If you cannot convince people to buy bonds or fund the defense voluntarily, then it would appear that you have so alienated your population that that nation does not deserve to survive.
If you are headed into a JUST war, I’ll be there. Old, fat and out of shape, maybe, but I’ll be there and even bring my own weapons, just as the Founders intended. If you cannot convince the Congress to declare war and openly and firmly commit itself and the nation to swift victory, then your “war” is more than likely not worth waging.
And on your other remark, there is NO HIGHER AUTHORITY (besides God) THAN THE INDIVIDUAL. There can ONLY BE individual ownership of property, whether it be a harbor or a mountain top. Now, in wartime, the rules can change a bit. But only when the Congress does its job and declares that a state of war exists. However, if private property MUST be taken for war use, it must be returned to its original state and returned to its owner, with full compensation, when hostilities end. If private property rights are not respected by government, which, in our case is why government is allowed to exist in the first place, then it is time that government be removed and replaced.
Can someone who is IN the service be ordered into danger? Yes. That is what the armed forces are for. If you do not believe in the cause, stay home. If you believe your society is worth protecting, you BELONG in the service. (And, to me, only those who have served should be able either to vote or to hold elective office.)
Can cops commandeer someone’s property in some sort of emergency? Probably not but provide an example.
As far as Amendment III goes, it is not the norm for troops of any sort to be involuntarily quartered in people’s homes. Which is a good thing. Could our current government try to put its watchers in our homes under any future circumstance? They might try, but I suspect they’d fail abjectly!
249 posted on
08/22/2009 8:13:14 PM PDT by
dcwusmc
(We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson