Saturday April 19, 2014
Jump to content
Put as succinctly as possible, our nation was founded on the principle that private rights (and concomitant responsibilities) trumped government authority. This was the first time in history a government was founded on those principles, and the result was -- until the federal and State governments went rogue -- a greater improvement in living standard, contentment, wealth, productivity, and PERSONAL LIBERTY than had occurred in the previous 25 centuries. And today, people like Ms Green and Mr. Mevis, who have never experienced grinding poverty and crushing tyranny, expect others to provide their every need as a matter of law. Well, Ms Green and Mr. Mevis have the personal authority, personal sovereignty if you will, to provide for themselves, and no authority to demand others to provide for them. Meanwhile the rest of us have the same personal sovereignty and the right to be secure from being compelled to provide for them, whether as an employer or as a taxpayer. We have the right to help them if we wish, and we have the right to say no when they demand that we provide for their needs. Government governs by the Consent of the Governed, and nowhere is the Consent delegated to rob the taxpayer or the business man to provide for those who cannot or will not provide for themselves.
The employees of these businesses and organizations are receiving compensation paid for by the employer. Quite aside from the religious freedom issue, the employers have a right to offer whatever compensation they choose, and the employees have the right to choose to accept it or find another employer who will offer them what they want. That is free choice. You are correct that once employees receive their compensation they can do with it as they wish, and no employers has the right to govern what they do with it. But neither does any employee have a right to demand a specific compensation, and the federal government sure as heck has no authority to back that demand up with penalties for non-compliance. And BTW, yes, that includes minimum wage -- the federal wage law is color of law; there is no delegated power to the federal government to mandate minimum wage, medical care, or ninety percent of everything else this rogue occupation government is doing. It is a tyranny no less than Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany when government refuses to obey the law that created it.
Who said "Religious organizations have been given exemption from providing the birth control coverage mandated by the ACA"? The Catholic church and commercial companies have been fighting tooth and nail to be free of the ACA requirements, and have not yet succeeded except by applying for a special "waiver" that may or may not be granted.
What about Hobby Lobby? The owners object to being required to pay for an elective medical procedure they oppose on religious grounds. Are you suggesting that the mandate to provide contraceptive insurance is not in violation of their right to the free exercise of their religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment? (Not to mention their right, my right, and your right, to be secure from color of law emanating from the federal government for which no Constitutional authority is delegated, but that is a different thread.)
I think perhaps you have forgotten, if you ever knew, the purpose of a State Senator in the first place. It is not his job to put money in your pocket, though by refusing to require home builders to spend more money, and thus require them to raise the prices for the homes they build, keeps the economy going by enabling them to sell more houses, make more money, hire more people, and thus put more money in your pocket. Remember, every dollar you save when you buy a house is more money you can use to buy other things you need -- and is more money you can put into insulating your house if that's what YOU believe you need. There is no reason why everyone in the State should pay for extras because the State thinks they need them: The State should recognize the rights of the people to make up their own mind what they need and what they can afford. That's why we have government, Robert: To protect the rights of the people to run their own lives, not micromanage their lives from on high.
They were doing that in Australia when I lived there. The result was what they called "The Donkey Vote," which consisted of scribbling all over the ballot and dropping it in the box just to avoid the A$10 penalty for not voting.
To the contrary, the solution is not to require everyone to vote. The solution is to allow to vote only those who can prove they are eligible to vote. And an improvement -- a BIG improvement -- would be to prohibit anyone from voting who is receiving government welfare in any form. (That does not include Social Security, which is a Ponzi scheme and should be abolished immediately with all monies paid in returned to those who paid it in, plus interest.)
By prohibiting anyone receiving government welfare from voting, we remove the incentive of politicians to buy votes by promising to rob Peter to pay Paul. As Margaret Thatcher said, "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
The purpose of the Marxist Mafia spending our nation into oblivion is that the more debt a nation owes, the more poor people it has to feed, and when poor people depend on government for their sustenance, they don't fight back when government ignores their individual rights with extreme prejudice. We are in the precipitous stages of government insurrection against the founding principles of our government. We need to stop it.
I have no problem with contraception for men or women, and I agree, it is men's responsibility to the same extent as it is women's responsibility. But it is no one's responsibility to provide contraceptives for someone he or she is not involved with sexually. If men and women are going to be responsible, and they should be, it is their responsibility to pay for it, and no one else's.
Ted, are you capable of posting a rational, thoughtful, or factual message on this board? Are you on drugs of some kind? I never liked the phrase when my father used it, but your messages are proof of his observation "some people sound like they are on a dope." See if you can pay attention for a few seconds here, Ted: I don't like John McCain because the only time he ever sounds or acts like a Republican is when he is campaigning. The rest of the time he sounds like a RINO and quite often he sounds like a Marxist-Democrat under cover, and sometimes he just sounds like an idiot -- and most of the time it is difficult to distinguish between the last two, just as it is when I read your messages.
Now if you have anything else to add to this subject, why don't you start with an explanation of your totally irrational claim about the Sheriffs of Arizona declaring war on the federal government? I didn't say anything like that. I just want the federal government to stop its insurrection against the U.S. Constitution and the fundamental liberties under the rule of law this nation was founded to preserve and protect for the first time in more than 25 centuries.
You really ought to wise up and find out where your bogus political ideology, if you can call it that, is leading you.
Oh, they are there all right, but they are not "at home." They don't belong there. Their presence there is the result of the most massive con-game the world has ever suffered, and there have been many. There remains only one approach that will save our nation from certain descent into a Soviet-style cesspool of tyranny and oppression, and even that will likely not prevent a knock-down drag-out fight: That is to adopt the position, and present it firmly and implacably and without quarter to every legislative, executive, and judicial official to which we have access, that America is founded upon principles of liberty under the rule of law, and that the U.S. Constitution (as LAWFULLY amended, i.e., not including the 16th and 17th) IS the rule of law, and WILL BE obeyed every time, no exceptions and no excuses. If the power is not delegated in so many words to the federal government in that document, the federal government DOESN'T HAVE IT. We will not comply with color of law imposed without Constitutional authority.
You can also go to http://www.conventionofstates.com/welcome]. Facebook is eevill ... some of us won't go near it.
You accuse the Tea Party of unnecessary “Warnings of impending doom” caused by the administration of President Obama (Roundup, Feb. 18th). You claim you are free because you can attend any one of more than 30 different churches and worship as you please. That’s true, so long as the church does not preach adherence to the U.S. Constitution, upon pain of losing its tax exempt status.
You claim you can state your opinions in public as much as you please. That’s true, as long as you don’t offend Muslims, or Gays, or Blacks, or post an Internet picture on a college campus expressing displeasure over Midterm exams, or suggest that a certain murderous tyrant should be arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and lined up and shot.
You claim you can travel anywhere you choose at any time you choose. That’s true, as long as you don’t fly or if you do, you don’t have a lapel pin in the shape of a pistol, don’t have a fingernail file or penknife, don’t have a toy monkey with a 2-inch toy pistol in its hand, etc. And now the TSA is conducting “grope-a-dope” of men, women, the elderly, infirm, and even infants at some bus and train stations. And shall we ignore the DUI and illegal immigrant checkpoints, conducted without probable cause of wrongdoing, if we travel by car?
You own a gun (a hypocrisy, given previous LTE's) and aren’t afraid it will be taken from you by the government, in spite of the U.S. Senate’s attempted passage of a bill a very few months ago that would have outlawed virtually every semi-auto firearm in the nation, and in spite of your Dear Leaders’ signature on the UN Arms Trade Treaty that will outlaw every privately-owned firearm in the country if it is ratified by the Senate.
You claim the country is still “mostly” run by people who have been elected, not dictated. That’s true, except for those States where George Soros has said, on network television, that “we own the voting machines.”
You note that this president has issued far fewer Administrative (Executive) Orders than any president in recent times. That’s true, except that at least 29 of those Executive Orders have involved arbitrary changes to the ObamaCare legislation he has no legislative authority to make.
You claim your grandchildren can pray in their public schools, yet children have been prohibited from doing so at many public schools across the nation, upon pain of expulsion on the bogus "separation of church and State" doctrine..
And need I mention the unwarranted IRS attention paid to pro-Constitution Tea Party groups, and anyone who criticizes your Dear Leader on network television, such as neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson?
I invite you to wake up and smell the stench of advancing totalitarianism, Noble Collins.
Last login: today