Posted on 07/05/2010 5:20:59 AM PDT by Kaslin
The right to private property was one of the central issues involved in the American Revolution. The colonists’ cries of “taxation without representation” were but protests of what they saw as an unjust taking of private property.
The Declaration of Independence charges the King of England with engaging in 10 acts of abuse, of which half are offenses against private property. Most significantly, the Declaration lists the pursuit of happiness as one of man’s primary inalienable rights. The founders believed that liberty, happiness, and property were inextricably tied together.
Over the years, the American occupation with private property has not receded. Indeed, the question of private property remains a central part of our national political conversation. The political rhetoric may not always reflect it, but if one scratches the surface of arguments surrounding universal healthcare; entitlements; budgetary deficits; business regulation; cap-and-trade, or even abortion, one will find an argument involving the God-given right to private property.
The founders, of course, did not understand property simply to mean one’s possessions. Property was understood to include the fruit of one’s labor; it included a man’s conscience—the things he believed and thought, and the ideals he held dear. James Madison wrote that individuals have a property, “In their opinions and the free exercise of them.” As well as “a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions and in the profession and practice dictated by them.” In short, “as man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.”
The founders were then of the same mind as John Locke, who wrote in his “Second Treatise on Government:” “The great and chief end therefore, of men united into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property.”
Some Americans continue to share the belief that the right to private property is sacrosanct--other Americans, not so much.
In a 2001 radio interview, a young Barack Obama lamented that the Warren Court had not been more radical and had not addressed the redistribution of wealth, which is to say the redistribution of private property. Obama continued to opine that the Constitution was a charter of “negative liberties,” which failed to declare, “What the federal or state government must do on your behalf.” The truth is that when read through the lens of the Declaration, the Constitution lays out the manner in which the government will carry out the commission with which government has principally been charged: protecting each citizen’s private property!
It is truly a tragic sign of the times, that to be in favor of private property is increasingly viewed as being extreme. Witness the manner in which the New Left demonizes the political right, sneering that Republicans view all regulation of business as evil. Like so much of the current political rhetoric, this claim is wanting for lack of truth.
Regulation is not a zero sum question. The choice is not to be made between regulation and lawlessness. Rather, the question is one of the manner and extent of any proposed regulations. Are the regulations prudent and do they preserve the government mandate to protect the lives, liberties, and private property of each individual? Or is it bureaucratic micromanagement--an attempt to redistribute property, and/or choose economic winners and losers? That is the issue, and it is no wonder that the New Left chooses to put up straw-men rather than argue the merits and morality of its specific regulatory propositions.
Like the founders, conservatives believe that the free market must be regulated by the rule of law and by those civil institutions responsible for building and maintaining an individual’s character. In other words, any business must conform to both criminal and civil laws, (which must be enforced), must be held to contractual obligations, and must respect the private property of other citizens. Conservatives also share the conviction of the founders that citizens raised with a sense of Judea/Christian morality and educated in civic virtue--as opposed to moral relativism and secular progressivism--will tend not to need the eyes of Uncle Sam looking over their shoulder.
There are, alas, a great many Americans that tend toward the progressive view that in order to achieve “social justice” the government ought to own, well, everything.
John Adams perhaps put it best when he said: “The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
G-d gave me my rights
If need be, Bushmaster and Glock will keep them for me.
Time is drawing near.
Obama reiterated his Marxist lie just yesterday in his Independence Day remarks. He talked to the crown about the Founders as men of wealth and property, as though owning a plot of land and working a one mule farm was unethical. In order to vote one was required to own something, to have a vested interest in the economy. At a time when 99% of our citizens worked for themselves and owned their own home that was reasonable.
We have lost the responsibility that goes with entitlement. Today anyone living under a bridge or in a cardboard box is entitled to vote. If you can breath you can vote. Even if you can no longer breath someone will happily vote for you.
When those with nothing to lose are incited to vote, the interests of those who are living the American Dream are endangered. This is such a time. Our president and his wife are so proud.
No regulation with out representation.
All regulatory boards, having legislative, executive and judicial functions skanked in one body, and an affront to democratic government, should have large popular elected chambers.
“G-d gave me my rights
If need be, Bushmaster and Glock will keep them for me.
Time is drawing near. “
I’m with you my friend!
The 2nd is not about hunting, or crime. It is a political statement, about armed political power and expression in the hands of masses.
We’ve had two inter American killing fests in this country and we came out of it a vastly better nation.
Third time is a charm.
That’s just more racist rantings.........................
oh, he’s black ;-)
Thr ‘’Modern-Day-Certified-Snot-Faced-Liberals’’ don’t like the kinda talk. MDCSFL’s
"In a 2001 radio interview, a young Barack Obama lamented that the Warren Court had not been more radical and had not addressed the redistribution of wealth, which is to say the redistribution of private property. Obama continued to opine that the Constitution was a charter of “negative liberties,” which failed to declare, “What the federal or state government must do on your behalf.” The truth is that when read through the lens of the Declaration, the Constitution lays out the manner in which the government will carry out the commission with which government has principally been charged: protecting each citizen’s private property!"
"It is truly a tragic sign of the times, that to be in favor of private property is increasingly viewed as being extreme. Witness the manner in which the New Left demonizes the political right, sneering that Republicans view all regulation of business as evil. Like so much of the current political rhetoric, this claim is wanting for lack of truth."
Marxists want to eliminate private property. In a marxist paradise the only ones who posess anything are the elite who make laws for other people to obey and keep everyone but themselves in poverty.
Alex Jones breaks down the takeover by offshore banking powers– newly empowered by Congress’ banking “reform,” expanded taxes worldwide, as well as accelerated moves towards ending the Dollar’s reserve status, including urging from a recent United Nations report.
This Fourth of July, the United States is indeed in peril; it is not only the Gulf Oil Spill, Russian spies and threats of war with Iran which Americans must worry about. Instead it is the quiet but deadly conquest by private, central banks, who lobbied Congress to once again vest new powers in the Federal Reserve and, by all indicators, further weaken the U.S. economy through its future actions.
The financial crisis has indeed been developed in such a way that no nation can ever repay all the debt, and control by global economic forces is all but inevitable.
“This is as big as World War I or World War II,” Alex Jones comments.
“What is happening now is bigger than the banking takeover of 1913… it is a worldwide financial coup d’etat.”
Video:
http://4closurefraud.org/2010/07/05/emergency-s-o-s-america-falling-to-foreign-bank-takeover/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.