John Locke

Chapter 9 – The ends of Civil Society

Having set out what constitutes a civil society and how civil societies are formed, Locke sets about discussing what why would any man in a state of nature join a civil society, and what is the purpose of end of that civil society. He reminds us that in a state of nature every man has … Read more

John Locke

“Of the beginning of Civil Society” – Part 2

We see this delegation and retention of power in Exodus 22. In general, the adjudication of theft is left to society. The theft is brought before the judges to determine guilt and the amount that must be repaid. However, it begins in Exodus 22:2 with the principle that there is no guilt in killing someone who breaks into your house at night.

Read more

John Locke

“Of the beginning of Civil Society” – Part 1

John Locke having defined what qualifies as a civil society in Chapter Seven. That it is not merely family groups, or master-slave relationships, but is a coming together of equals for mutual benefit and protection. He opened with this declaration which ought to be familiar to the people of New Hampshire.

Read more

Sanctuary: Imposition of Religious Belief?

What is sanctuary? Sanctuary involves congregations declaring themselves official “sanctuaries”. That means they are committed to providing support to refugees. Various denominations participate. Movement members act in defiance of federal laws they oppose and they uphold laws they think their government violates. Where did sanctuary come from? The historical roots of the movement derive from … Read more

Quotes

Notable Quote – Roger Simon

by Skip

“As people scramble to explain the sudden resurgence of socialism not only on America’s college campuses but also in the corridors of political power, it is worth noting the concomitant resurgence of anti-Semitism in those redoubts. The coincidence is not, as the Marxists like to say, an accident. The truth is that unfettered socialism, though based primarily on a demand for the abolition of private property, always comes riding on a current of anti-Semitism.”

Read more

Facebook Doodlings – Justice? Which one?

by Skip

Steve’s post on former NH State Senate Minority Leader  Jeff ‘The Bruiser’ Woodburn had an interesting comment left on it on Facebook:

Joanne Hack Again, ALLEGED abuser … are we not supposed to be the voice of reason and say that he’s not convicted of anything so, since this is America, he shouldn’t have to resign. I don’t know the guy and I don’t have any opinion of him, but still he hasn’t been convicted of anything.

– one I decided to answer (emphasis here):

Read more

Dismantling a “positive activist government” is a bad thing?

by Skip

Translation: what Katrina vanden Heuval, editor and publisher of the Far Left “The Nation” calls “a positive activist Government” I call a Progressive’s wet dream.  What she, as truly a fine example of a far Leftist, wants is a Government that is invested in every aspect of our lives and has no problem with that Government taking private property from some to give to others, believing that the Marxist ideal of “social justice” is actually written in our Constitution (a la “separation .

Who the heck am I trying to kid – these folks HATE the “negativist” (which tells government what it canNOT do, to limit government to preserve Liberty) Constitution – that scrap of paper that, according to them, should have been sent to the toilet paper factory centuries ago.  And yes, I mean that, given how a multitude of data dots are all self-connecting themselves this past week from decades of Progressivism and the Reign of Comrade Obama these last few years.  How else can you explain the verbiage from their mouths and the actions of their works?  At least vanden Heuvel is honest about it – talks AND walks the talk (easier when one is rich and “got mine” is pervasive).

From This Week with George Stephanopolous:

Ron Fournier (National Journal) – People are looking, outside of government, for their own workarounds around the Federal Government.  Millenials have a high level of civic engagement but polls show that they do not trust government.  What this means is that people like that, the next generation, are staying out of Government. That’s not a good thing.

George Will: Big Government (back at him), the best construction of the IRS, the scandal is that Big Government is impossible to monitor.  That’s the lesson of this!

Ron Fournier (National Journal) – But any government has to be trusted. These scandals are only ….

George Will: Every government has to be trusted but bigger the Government gets the bigger the distrust ought to be and will be.

Katrina vanden Heuval: But I have never understood why people that hate government go into government because we are seeing an intent to dismantle a positive activist government.  There are Millenials around this country who still see as they face  student debt and other factors, a need for a positive government that would improve the conditions of peoples’ lives.

I can tell you, Katrina!

Read more

Paul Ryan on Poverty

by Skip

“The mindset behind this approach is that a nation should measure compassion by the size of the federal government and how much it spends….The problem is, starting in the 1960s, this top-down approach created and perpetuated a debilitating culture of dependency, wrecking families and communities.”

There’s a vast middle ground between the government and the individual.  Our families and our neighborhoods, the groups we join and our places of worship – this is where we live our lives.  They shape our character, give our lives direction, and help make us a self-governing people.”

From Paul Ryan’s speech of yesterday (courtesy of Washington Examiner via Heritage).

 I’ve listened, for years now, that we have to help the poor, the misfortunate, and those well off than ourselves.  Actually, I’ve heard that message almost since I became “self-aware” – time after time hearing that from my parents, my family, and in church.  According to them, it was a moral imperative.  And I still, to this day, agree with it wholeheartedly.  It was up to me – that *I* had to be the one to personally do the reaching out, to personally roll up the sleeves, to personally unload my wallet.

In other words – the message was one of personal responsibility – that the Sermon on the Mount was meant for ME; that Jesus’s admonish of “to the least” was directed to my heart, my compassion, and my willingness to put away my idea of what was important and to just go and do.  And “do” was not something to be outsourced to others – it was, and remains, a personal responsibility, an outgrowth of a Christian heart and a demonstration of obedience to His Commandments of a personal transformation and willingness to walk in His footsteps.

It was never a command to “outsource that responsibility to unknown people in Government to do it for me”.  Yet, that is what our current society has done – especially those Progressives who believe that ONLY government programs can suffice.  In fact, during a recent John Stossel program, the head of NYC’s Human Resources Administration Robert Doar openly and publicly stated that it was his determined opinion that charity could NEVER do what Government could.  And Big Govt folks, in area after area after area, have used the size, money, and coercion of the State to crowed out almost all of the formerly private charitable organizations and have co-opted many of those that remain with money – with strings attached (in essence, making them nothing more than a further outreach of governmental bodies and kingdoms).

And most Progressives agree – yet, even having spent over $20 Trillion on the “poor” since the War on Poverty began, and now almost $1 Trillion annually, is that really the solution?    I disagree vehemently – the Progressive intent, started in full measure by FDR, has not had the result of that intent.  In fact, it has been a failure by the easiest of measures – has all that money actually solved the problem?

The answer, plain and simple, is no.  And Progressives continue to shriek that decreasing Federal and State budgets “will hurt the poor” – a self-continuing circle (and one in which, if you simply look at Joe Biden’s charitable contributions on his tax returns as a typical example, show little personal concern in what used to be a personal responsibility).

Read more

Share to...