Replies

Thomas Jefferson's quote (I'm surprised you'd take non-Constitutional text and pass it off as valid to the law) would only make sense if he felt public assistance was fraudulent and taken by force. I don't believe he felt that way, and I believe the quote has been taken out of its larger context anyway. But just to humor you, our quadriplegic has the right to take by force his property (use of his body, his means of earning a living) which was taken from him by another (the drunk driver) by force or fraud. The quadriplegic has a natural right to his property. Thomas Jefferson is saying that our quadriplegic has natural rights, part of common law, recognized by all the authorities and regulated as to the circumstances of practice. So who will guarantee him these rights? Private charity? The state has the legal duty, not the Church, the obligation to see to guaranteeing our quadriplegic his rights. In the absence of restoring the use of his limbs, enabling our quadriplegic to earn his own living, the state has the obligation to guarantee our quadriplegic has the legal means to recover adequate compensation to cover the loss of his limbs. Normally, he would recover from the drunk driver, but if the drunk driver has no money, the state is not absolved of its responsibility to protect our quadriplegic's rights under the law.

You are incorrect on both counts. It has not been taken out of context, and here's why:

"A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned -- this is the sum of good government." - Thomas Jefferson.