And you're willing to visit the numbing power of a police state on all for that meager purpose? 
Posted on 06/12/2002 11:57:24 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
Edited on 04/12/2004 5:38:44 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
VICTORVILLE, Calif. (AP) - A man described by a judge as "an evil monster" was sentenced to 25 years in prison for using a baseball bat, metal pipe and golf club to attack a 12-year-old Halloween trick-or-treater on his doorstep.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
A mere state or the citizens of such? Come on, they can't even outlaw pot!
Who are they to kill me?
Exactly. My nephew is an Lt in the Marine Corps and my son in law is a former Marine as well. Although I'm in pretty good shape for a Grandpa, either one could dispatch me forthwith. If they get to my backyard, I'll have a few surprises for them but it'll be short and sweet. I have to be in bed by 9.
Mental note.. delay the invasion till..
:)
"Socialism...confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain."
Present-day writers -- especially those of the socialist school of thought -- base their various theories upon one common hypothesis: They divide mankind into two parts. People in general -- with the exception of the writer himself -- from the first group. The writer, all alone, forms the second and most important group.
These socialist writers look upon people in the same manner that the gardener views his trees. Just as the gardener capriciously shapes the trees into pyramids, parasols, cubes, vases, fans, and other forms, just so does the socialist writer whimsically shape human beings into groups, series, centers, sub-centers, honeycombs, labor corps, and other variations. And just as the gardener needs axes, pruning hooks, saws, and shears to shape his trees, just so does the socialist writer need the force that he can find only in law to shape human beings.
"[Socialists]...look upon society as an artificial creation of the legislator's genius...To these intellectuals and writers, the relationship between persons and the legislator appears to be the same as the relationship between the clay and the potter.
"Moreover, even where they have consented to recognize a principle of action in the heart of man -- and a principle of discernment in man's intellect -- they have considered these gifts from God to be fatal gifts. They have thought that persons, under the impulse of these two gifts, would fatally tend to ruin themselves. They assume that if the legislators left persons free to follow their own inclinations, they would arrive at atheism instead of religion, ignorance instead of knowledge, poverty instead of production and exchange."
"According to these writers, it is indeed fortunate that Heaven has bestowed upon certain men -- governors and legislators -- the exact opposite inclinations, not only for their own sake but also for the sake of the rest of the world! While mankind tends toward evil, the legislators yearn for good; while mankind advances toward darkness, the legislators aspire for enlightenment; while mankind is drawn toward vice, the legislators are attracted toward virtue. Since they have decided that this is the true state of affairs, they then demand the use of force in order to substitute their own inclinations for those of the human race."
"The claims of these organizers of humanity raise another question which I have often asked them and which, so far as I know, they have never answered: If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? The organizers maintain that society, when left undirected, rushes headlong to its inevitable destruction because the instincts of the people are so perverse. The legislators claim to stop this suicidal course and to give it a saner direction."
Excerpts taken from The Law.
And you're willing to visit the numbing power of a police state on all for that meager purpose?
Some alcoholic beverages are legal, some aren't. Some drugs are legal, some aren't.
Sure they do. Anarchy is destructive of the systems of rights which America has developed over centuries.
"All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention." --Benjamin Franklin
"It is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from nature at all. It is agreed by those who have seriously considered the subject that no individual has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land, for instance. By a universal law, indeed, whatever, whether fixed or movable, belongs to all men equally and in common is the property for the moment of him who occupies it; but when he relinquishes the occupation, the property goes with it. Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society." --Thomas Jefferson
Ignorant. False.
False. Public swimming pools aren't Bibles.
Not at all. Residence within a state is as voluntary as residence in a leased property.
Irrelevant.
You said, "the public has decided to establish such rights."
If the public can establish rights then it logically follows that the public can de-establish them.
Residence within a state does not constitute a grant of power to the state.
Irrelevant.
Your claim was false. That's relevant.
Sure it does.
So, which is it, Roscoe? Either the public can establish rights or they can't. If the public can establish rights then it logically follows that the public can de-establish them. If the public can establish that no right exists to use drugs then it can establish that no right exists to practice religion.
From where did the public acquire the power to etablish rights?
No, it doesn't.
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.