Where Do Your “Rights” Come From?

If your rights are not endowed by God, but are arbitrarily granted by man, then those rights can arbitrarily be taken away by man. We are seeing that taking place RIGHT NOW. Also, a “right” does not take away from another. If you look at many/most of the so-called “rights” granted by government, they take from one to redistribute to another. “Free” healthcare, “free” education, etc. The government takes by force from those who have earned these things to provide them to those who have not. When men and government decide that your rights are inconvenient, they can arbitrarily take them away. Right to bear arms? Government sees that as a threat, so they are trying to take it away. Right to choose your own doctor? Government views that as unnecessary and “unfair,” so they HAVE taken that away. The right to free speech? Already gone. The government can decide if your words are “hateful” and whether or not you can speak them. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Yes, now even your basic right to LIFE is at the whim of the government if we have allowed them to take our other rights AND the ability to defend them.

Do you think you STILL live in a free country? Think again. Do you want to live in a truly free country? Then fight for it.



Liberty — Endowed by Whom?

The Eternal Bequest

By Mark Alexander · Jul. 3, 2013

“God who gave us life gave us Liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.” –Thomas Jefferson (1774)

Amid all the contemporary political and cultural contests, too many conservatives fail to make the case for overarching eternal truths – whether in debate with adversaries across the aisles of Congress, or with neighbors across Main Street.

Lost in the din is the foundational endowment of Essential Liberty, and any debate that does not begin with this eternal truth will end with temporary deceits.

The most oft-cited words from our Declaration of Independence are these: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The eternal assertion that Liberty for all people is “endowed by their Creator” and is thus “unalienable” should require no defense, because “we hold these truths to be self-evident,” and because the rights of man are irrevocable from the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”

But the root of all debate between Liberty and tyranny – or, in political parlance, between Right and left – is the contest to assert who endows Liberty – God or man. Continue reading

America: A Nation on Her Death Bed

What is the single biggest reason for this decay in our society?
Biblical illiteracy.

+
+


50 Facts That Show How Far America Has Fallen In This Generation

American-Flag-Tattered-Public-Domain-300x225

What has happened to America?  Please show these numbers to anyone that does not believe that the United States is in decline.  It is time for all of us to humble ourselves and face the reality of what has happened to our once great nation.  For those of us that love America, it is heartbreaking to watch the foundations of our society rot and decay in thousands of different ways.  The following are 50 facts that show how far America has fallen in this generation, but the truth is that this list could have been far, far longer…

#1 According to a survey that was just conducted, only 36 percent of all Americans can name the three branches of government.

#2 Only 25 percent of all Americans know how long U.S. Senators are elected for (6 years), and only 20 percent of all Americans know how many U.S. senators there are. Continue reading

More Cities Consider Using Eminent Domain to Halt Foreclosures

The increasing use of eminent domain to benefit the GOVERNMENT rather than for “public use” as outlined in the 5th Amendment, is disturbing, and yet another sign that government has strayed completely off of the reservation established for government by the Constitution. The founding fathers were very clear that private property ownership was a cornerstone of our republic.

Suppose a nation, rich and poor, high and low, ten millions in number, all assembled together; not more than one or two millions will have lands, houses, or any personal property; if we take into the account the women and children, or even if we leave them out of the question, a great majority of every nation is wholly destitute of property, except a small quantity of clothes, and a few trifles of other movables. Would Mr. Nedham be responsible that, if all were to be decided by a vote of the majority, the eight or nine millions who have no property, would not think of usurping over the rights of the one or two millions who have? Property is surely a right of mankind as really as liberty. Perhaps, at first, prejudice, habit, shame or fear, principle or religion, would restrain the poor from attacking the rich, and the idle from usurping on the industrious; but the time would not be long before courage and enterprise would come, and pretexts be invented by degrees, to countenance the majority in dividing all the property among them, or at least, in sharing it equally with its present possessors. Debts would be abolished first; taxes laid heavy on the rich, and not at all on the others; and at last a downright equal division of every thing be demanded, and voted. What would be the consequence of this? The idle, the vicious, the intemperate, would rush into the utmost extravagance of debauchery, sell and spend all their share, and then demand a new division of those who purchased from them. 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. If “Thou shalt not covet,” and “Thou shalt not steal,” were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.
John Adams; The Founders’ Constitution; Volume 1, Chapter 16, Document 15

Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.
James Madison; The Founders’ Constitution; Volume 1, Chapter 16, Document 23

It would also be a breach of contract law, stepping in to violate the terms of a contract entered into legally and willingly between two parties, when neither party had breached the contract. If you think it’s hard to get a mortgage now, wait until you start cheating the banks out of what they are legally owed from the loans they have made.

Governments employing or exploring the use of eminent domain are severely stretching the meaning of “public use.” Some cities say they plan to take over the mortgages rather than the homes themselves, “saying that will prevent foreclosure, blight and falling property values. If the owners of the mortgages — mostly banks and investors — balk, the letters said, the city could use eminent domain to condemn and buy them.” In other instances, cities have “condemned” and declared eminent domain over private property in order to give it to OTHER PRIVATE PARTIES who will pay HIGHER TAXES. While the goal of preventing “foreclosure, blight and falling property values” sounds good, they are attempting to do so by violating the 5th Amendment, of which the applicable part says…

“nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Confiscating private property to raise tax revenue does NOT constitute “public use.”


Link to article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/16/business/more-cities-consider-eminent-domain-to-halt-foreclosures.html?_r=2&


Is It Time to Organize the Revolution?

I’m not advocating anyone open fire. We need to UNITE, and come up with our list of grievances which our government must address. Some things are non-negotiable. We must resist, beginning by simply not playing their game. If THEY choose violence, abductions, murders, detentions, etc., then game on.

Our government is obviously preparing for war with us, so we also need to be prepared. Are you prepared to die to preserve your liberty, or more importantly the liberty of your children and grandchildren? If not, then we have no chance.  And they know it.

Leave comments on the page linked to below to add recommendations on what our demands need to be.
+


Is It Time to Organize the Revolution?

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.” -Patrick Henry

libgunAbout 45 days ago I wrote an article entitled “If They Come for Your Guns Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?” At the time this article, from an obscure blogger, changed my world. Within days I had become part of something much bigger than I could have ever imagined. The post was featured on literally hundreds of websites, and to date has received millions of readers.

How did it happen? Well on January 3rd, people were still not saying what needed to be said and I suppose I was one of the first to say it. It is not about deer hunting and we are all covered by a second amendment which is about our rights to protect ourselves from tyranny. So I said it. If they come for your guns it is not only your right but your responsibility to fight. Yes, that includes firing upon them. It’s not about hunting deer. The second amendment is about hunting tyrants.

Continue reading

Warning to all Politicians –WE WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO DISARM US

It is time to speak plainly for the good citizens and patriots of this nation who believe unbendingly in the Constitution of the United States of America. Though foreign governments may disarm their subjects, we will not go down that road. We will not disarm and see our freedoms stripped away. The lessons of history are numerous, clear, and bloody. A disarmed population inevitably becomes an enslaved population. A disarmed population is without power, reduced to childlike obedience to-and dependence upon –the organs of a parental state. A disarmed population will lose-either piecemeal or in one sweeping act –those basic rights for which the citizens of America gave their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor over 200 years ago.

We will not disarm. The right to self-protection, the internal directive of every living creature, be it mouse or man, is the most fundamental right of all. It is a right that must be exercised against the of the streets, against the predators hidden within agencies of law enforcement, and against the most dangerous predators of all –those to be found in government, whose insidious grasping for power is relentless and never-ending.

We will not disarm. Not in the face of robbers, rapists, and murderers who prey upon our families and friends; nor in the face of police and bureau agents who would turn a blind eye to the Constitution, who would betray the birthright of their countrymen; nor in the face of politicians of the lowest order-those who pander to the ignorant, the weak, the fearful, the naive; those indebted to a virulent strain of the rich who insulate themselves from the dangers imposed upon other Americans and then preach disarmament.

We will not surrender our handguns.

We will not surrender our hunting arms.

And we will not surrender our firearms of military pattern or military utility, nor their proper furnishings, nor the right to buy, to sell, or to manufacture such items.

Firearms of military utility, which serve well and nobly in times of social disturbance as tools of defense for the law-abiding, serve also in the quiet role of prevention, against both the criminal and the tyrannical. An armed citizenry, the well-regulated militia of the Second Amendment, properly armed with military firearms –is a powerful deterrent, on both conscious and subconscious levels, to those inclined toward governmental usurpation.

An armed citizenry stands as a constant reminder to those in power that, though they may violate our rights temporarily, they will not do so endlessly and without consequence.

Should Americans again be confronted with the necessity of, may God forbid it, throwing off the chains of a tyrannical and suffocating regime, firearms designed to answer the particular demands of warfare will provide the swiftest and most decisive this end. Any law which prohibits or limits a citizen’s possession of firearms of military utility or their proper furnishings, provides an open window through which a corrupt government will crawl to steal away the remainder of our firearms and our liberties.

Any law which prohibits or limits a citizen’s possession of firearms of military utility or their proper furnishings, being directly contrary to the letter and spirit of the Second Amendment, is inimical to the Constitution, to the United States of America, and to its citizens. Now-today-we are witnessing the perilous times foreseen by the architects of the Constitution. These are times when our government is demanding –in the guise of measures for the common good –the relinquishment of several rights guaranteed to Americans in the Constitution, foremost among which is the right to keep and bear arms for our own defense.

These are times when our government has abdicated its primary responsibility-to provide for the security of its citizens. Swift and sure punishment of outlaws is absent, and in its place is offered the false remedy of disarming the law-abiding. Where this unconstitutional action has been given the force of law, it has failed to provide relief and has produced greater social discord. This discord in turn now serves as the false basis for the demand that we give up other rights, and for the demand for more police, more agents of bureaucratic control to enforce the revocation of these rights. Legislators, justices and law officers must bear in mind that the foundation of their duties is to uphold the fundamental law of the land-the Constitution.

They must bear in mind that the unconstitutional act of disarming one’s fellow citizens will also disarm one’s parents, spouse, brothers, sisters, children and children’s children. They must bear in mind that there are good citizens who, taking heed of George Washington’s belief that arms are the liberty teeth of the people, will not passively allow these teeth to be torn out.

There are good citizens who, taking heed of Benjamin Franklin’s admonition that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety, will surrender not one of their rights. Those who eat away at our right to own and use firearms are feeding on the roots of a plant over two centuries old, a plant whose blossom is the most free, most powerful nation ever to exist on the face of this planet. The right to keep and bear arms is the tap root of this plant. All other rights were won at the point of a gun and will endure only at the point of a gun. Could they speak, millions upon millions of this world’s dead souls would testify to this truth. Millions upon millions of the living can so testify today. Today is a critical moment in our history.

Will we Americans passively lie down before a government that has grown disdainful of its best citizens? Or will we again declare, “We are the government, government functions at our behest, and it may not rescind our sacred rights?” Will we place our faith in public servants who behave like our masters? Or will we place our faith in the God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ and remember the words and deeds of the daring, far-seeing men and women whose blood, sweat and tears brought forth this great nation?

Will we believe those who assure us that the police officer will shield us from the criminal? Or will we believe our eyes and ears, presented every day with news of our unarmed neighbors falling prey in their homes, on our streets, in our places of work and play?

Will we bow our heads to cowards and fools who will not learn and do not understand the lessons of human history? Or will we stand straight and assume the daily tasks and risks that liberty entails?

Will we ignore even the lessons of this present era-which has seen the cruel oppression of millions on the continents of Europe, Asia, Africa and South America-and believe that the continent of North America is immune to such political disease? Or will we wisely accept the realities of this world, wisely listen to and make use of the precautions provided by our ancestors?

Will we be deceived by shameless liars who say that disarmament equals safety, helplessness equals strength, patriotism equals criminality? Or will we mark the words of our forefathers, who wrote in plain language: The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?

Let us make known: We will choose the latter option in every case.

Legislators: Do your duty to your country. Uphold the Constitution as you swore to do. Do not shame yourselves by knocking loose the mighty keystone of this great republic –the right to bear arms.

Justices: Do your duty to your country. Examine the origins of our right to weaponry and uphold the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

Lawmen: Do your duty to your country. Do not be misguided and misused. Your task is to serve and to protect-not to oppress, to disarm and to make helpless your countrymen. To the blind, the ignorant, the apathetic, the safe and sheltered, these may seem to be concerns of another age. They are not. They are as vital as they ever have been through history. For times may change but human nature does not. And it is to protect forever against the evil in human nature that the Founding Fathers set aside certain rights as inviolable.

For these reasons we must now make known: We will not passively take the path that leads to tyranny. We will not go down that road. We Will Not Disarm.

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/02/warning-to-all-politicians-we-will-not-allow-you-to-disarm-us/


Moral or Immoral Government

This is one of the best treatises I’ve seen on the morality of taxation by our, or any government.  Does government have the right to tax?  Yes, but only when it is done with the consent of the taxed.


http://www.creators.com/opinion/walter-williams/moral-or-immoral-government.html

Moral or Immoral Government

By Walter E. Williams; Dec 8, 2010

Immorality in government lies at the heart of our nation’s problems. Deficits, debt and runaway government are merely symptoms. What’s moral and immoral conduct can be complicated, but needlessly so. I keep things simple and you tell me where I go wrong.

My initial assumption is that we each own ourselves. I am my private property and you are yours. If we accept the notion that people own themselves, then it’s easy to discover what forms of conduct are moral and immoral. Immoral acts are those that violate self-ownership. Murder, rape, assault and slavery are immoral because those acts violate private property. So is theft, broadly defined as taking the rightful property of one person and giving it to another.

If it is your belief that people do not belong to themselves, they are in whole or in part the property of the U.S. Congress, or people are owned by God, who has placed the U.S. Congress in charge of managing them, then all of my observations are simply nonsense.

Let’s look at some congressional actions in light of self-ownership. Do farmers and businessmen have a right to congressional handouts? Does a person have a right to congressional handouts for housing, food and medical care?

First, let’s ask: Where does Congress get handout money? One thing for sure, it’s not from the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus nor is it congressmen reaching into their own pockets. The only way for Congress to give one American one dollar is to first, through the tax code, take that dollar from some other American. It must forcibly use one American to serve another American. Forcibly using one person to serve another is one way to describe slavery. As such, it violates self-ownership.

Government immorality isn’t restricted only to forcing one person to serve another. Some regulations such as forcing motorists to wear seatbelts violate self-ownership. If one owns himself, he has the right to take chances with his own life.

Some people argue that if you’re not wearing a seatbelt, have an accident and become a vegetable, you’ll become a burden on society. That’s not a problem of liberty and self-ownership. It’s a problem of socialism where through the tax code one person is forcibly used to care for another.

These examples are among thousands of government actions that violate the principles of self-ownership. Some might argue that Congress forcing us to help one another and forcing us to take care of ourselves are good ideas. But my question to you is: When congressmen and presidents take their oaths of office, is that oath to uphold and defend good ideas or the U.S. Constitution?

When the principles of self-ownership are taken into account, two-thirds to three-quarters of what Congress does violate those principles to one degree or another as well as the Constitution to which they’ve sworn to uphold and defend. In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 to assist some French refugees, James Madison, the father of our Constitution, stood on the floor of the House to object, saying, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” Did James Madison miss something in the Constitution?

You might answer, “He forgot the general welfare clause.” No, he had that covered, saying, “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one.”

If we accept the value of self-ownership, it is clear that most of what Congress does is clearly immoral. If this is bothersome, there are two ways around my argument. The first is to deny the implications of self-ownership. The second is to ask, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi did when asked about the constitutionality of Obamacare, “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at http://www.creators.com.


American Socialists Release Names of 70 Congressional Democrats in Their Ranks

The people on this list are no surprise. They are the first targets for removal from office. November looms.


http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/08/american-socialists-release-names-of-70-congressional-democrats-in-their-caucus/

Posted by Jim Hoft on Friday, August 13, 2010, 4:16 PM


The Socialist Party of America announced in their October 2009 newsletter that 70 Congressional democrats currently belong to their caucus.
This admission was recently posted on Scribd.com:

American Socialist Voter–
Q: How many members of the U.S. Congress are also members of the DSA?
A: Seventy

Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee?
A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez,
Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA].

Q: Who are these members of 111th Congress?
A: See the listing below

Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)

House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)


%d bloggers like this: