Replies

I have enjoyed reading your posts throughout this thread, but I must bring forward the issue of selective enforcement of laws which the liberals in conservative clothing are advocating.

I find it very disturbing the recent action of the NJSC. It is reflective of this discussion as it is a selective interpretation of statutes, which are enforced only the political whim of the party in power. This random application of our nation's laws, along with creative interpretation will be the failing of our Republic. When the Legislative branch creates laws which oppress some individuals or laws which are designed to profit another group (i.e., healthnazis, trial lawyers), then what has been endorsed is a slow dismemberment of our Constitution. It is my belief that by clogging the courts with these lawsuits, while creating oppressive regulation on laissez-faire capitalism, that our Republic could cease to function in less than 50 years.

Unless self-responsibility becomes the precedent again of our legislative structure, we are doomed.

I posted on the same subject to Templar yesterday a comment that applies just as well here:

The Rule of Law as understood by the Old Whig tradition that founded this nation was something seperate from just the legal process. It contained the freedom from arbitrary power and equality under law, a blind justice.
Law applied in the manner of activist judges leads to arbirary application of punishment. The lowly, under the eyes of courts or society, get the heavy punishment and the alleged worthy do not.
Society then reacts with harsher laws through representative legislative power as they see the rule of law unevenly applied. Activist judges then further pervert the process by applying more, and more, arbitrary justice as they see it rather than adjudicating an offense under the law and established precedent.

Well, it is late and I have to mow the lawn in the morning...nite all.