The American Patriot Party, The Oregon Patriot Party or Return to CDF Civil Defense Force
Freedom and Morality
Patrick Henry,
Founder of Freedom:
"Bad men cannot make good citizens.
It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains.
A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH FREEDOM.
No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES."
John Locke: 15. "To those that say there were never any men in the state of Nature, I will not oppose the authority of the judicious (Richard) Hooker (Eccl. Pol. i. 10), where he says, "the laws which have been hitherto mentioned" -- i.e., the laws of Nature -- "do bind men absolutely, even as they are men, although they have never any settled fellowship, never any solemn agreement amongst themselves what to do or not to do;but for as much as we are not by ourselves sufficient to furnish ourselveswith competent store of things needful for such a life as our Nature dothdesire, a life fit for the dignity of man,therefore to supply those defects and imperfections which are in us, as livingsingle and solely by ourselves, we are naturally induced to seek communionand fellowship with others; this was the cause of men uniting themselvesas first in politic societies." But I, moreover, affirm that all men arenaturally in that state, and remain so till, by their own consents, theymake themselves members of some politic society, and I doubt not, in the sequel of this discourse, to make it very clear."...
(see John Locke's "Essay Concerning The True Original, Extent, and End of Civil Government" for more.)
1.) Laws of Nature and of Natures God Entitle Them and Morality:
Acommon phrase you hear from many is ``who are you to dictate morality" or"normality", when laws are presented to restrict persons from doing certainactivities or distributing materials that are directly contrary to the ``Christian"faith.
This, when the fact is Nature's God and laws of nature by itself dictate morality, not any one man or group.
TheDeclaration of Independence: ".....and to assume among the powers of theearth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature'sGod entitle them, ..."
Laws of Nature and of Natures God Entitle Them.
Sanity of mind is an inalienable right.
Nor can man simply ignore or dispose of such basic principles of sanity and expect to be protected as he corrupts both himself and others around him;
In this, one is not entitled.
------------------------------
Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772:
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation;
the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave."
------------------------------
Thosethings or actions of individuals that corrupt this sanity are not inalienablerights. Such things are clear evidence of insanity.
People who fightagainst these facts show that the battle is within themselves and attemptin their actions to ignore obvious laws of nature and of true liberty.
True Liberty is defined in the:
Absolute Rights of the Colonists, 1772:
"Just and true liberty, equal and impartial liberty" in matters spiritual and temporal, is a thing that all Men are clearly entitled to, by the eternal and immutable laws Of God and nature, as well as by the law of Nations, & all well grounded municipal laws, which "must" have their foundation in the "former".--"
Richard Hooker, Eccl. Pol. iii. 9: 11.
"Human laws are measures in respect of men whose actions they must direct, howbeit such measures they are as have also their higher rules to be measured by, which rules are two --
the "law of God" and the "law of Nature"; so that laws human must be made according to the "general laws of Nature", and without contradiction to any "positive law" of "Scripture", otherwise they are "ill" made."
(see further history on this Author which John Locke and the Founders derived the laws of freedom)
-----------------------------
Inreality, there is only one area of life that presents a human with a issuethat is both a physical necessity and inevitability; and, a potentiallyharmful activity; and that is sexuality.
It is a physical condition that continually creates a demand.
Acondition which becomes a willful crime against Nature and Morality whenit is treated in a unnatural way, willfully (voluntarily) or un-willfullyenslaved, imposed upon others to accept through involuntary servitude, marketedor sold.
Unnatural activities are not new to the world, and have been here since the beginning.
Ithas been man's ability to see those activities as never being productive;which are indeed very damaging to anyone mentally and physically partakesin such activities and who wholly and habitually engages in them.
Areview of what is available on the Internet today if one wants or needs toknow, will illustrate that ours and other societies have within them a segmentthat wholly engages in the wholesale distribution of peoples lives who havebeen unable to distance themselves enough from what they have been in thepast drawn into, or are involved in, to understand just how much they arebeing injured.
Disease is only a obvious result from this activity, however the greatest damage is within the mind itself;
The mind being a muscle that when exercised with the correct laws of nature becomes strong and steady;
But when allowed constant and habitual misuse, it becomes weak, easily controlled by others and unstable.
Byusing natures natural demand, marketers of corruption of the laws of natureand a sound mind sell deviations of nature that corrupt its laws so to gainprofit from the confusion it creates;
Many of those that have beenlured into the pornography market are by materials most people have viewedone time or another which passed about and viewed by a natural curiosityfrom a wholly natural physical desire.
Many also have been indoctrinatedat a early age through seduction, molestation or rape by those who wouldprofit by some ones youthful folly, loneliness, naivety, unfortunate association,family relation or relationship.
-----------------------
Where nature creates a natural demand and attraction, and curiosity is natural,
Itis a wholly and complete misconception that the recruitment, indoctrination,marketing of peoples lives is in any way a right in a free country, or anycountry.
This is absolute falsehood.
2.) Defining an Individuals Inalienable Rights:
First,to understand where we have taken the wrong path in this country, lets lookat a Founders statement on the subject of rights and slavery:
----------------------
Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772:
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation;
the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave."
----------------------
Thepoint that is presented here is that inalienable rights cannot be lost toothers, lost from themselves, given away, sold, bargained for, or outlawed.
You or others cannot remove inalienable rights from yourself or others.
They are certain and inalienable rights.
To present that one, even of himself, could sell his rights, would be to allow for willful self slavery, which is wholly against the foundations of nature and of freedom.
So when and where does this slavery begin?
What must we do to protect these inalienable rights of all mankind?;
How do we differentiate between a person's "freedom of choice" and "Willful act of voluntary slavery"?
----------------------
Lets see what:
Thomas Jefferson says of rights and liberty and limits and law:
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within "limits" drawn around us by the "equal rights of others".
I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it "violates" the "rights" of the individual. ~~"
----------------------
The important key words are rightful liberty ie. Inalienable Rights and "Limits";
The laws of nature and of natures God entitle them define these Liberties, Inalienable Rights and Limits.
What are some of these "Limits?":
John Locke 6.
But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is "not" a "state of licence"; though man in that state have an uncontrollable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some "nobler use" than its bare preservation calls for it.
John Locke 57. ".... the end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to "preserve" and enlarge "freedom". For in all the states of created beings, capable of laws, "where there is no law" "there is no freedom".
For "liberty" is to be free from restraint and violence from others, which cannot be where there is no law; and is not, as we are told, "a liberty for every man to do what he lists." For who could be free, when every other man's humour might domineer over him?
But a liberty to dispose and order freely as he lists his person, actions, possessions, and his whole property within the "allowance" of "those laws" under which he "is", and therein not to be subject to the arbitrary will of another, but freely follow his own."
John Locke 59.This holds in all the laws a man is under, whether natural or civil. Is aman under the law of Nature? What made him free of that law? what gave hima free disposing of his property, according to his own will, within the compassof that law? I answer, an estate wherein he might be supposed capable to "know" "that law", that so he might keep his actions "within the bounds of it".When he has acquired that state, he is presumed to know how far that lawis to be his guide, and how far he may make use of his freedom, and so comes to have it;
John Locke 63. The freedom then of man, and liberty of acting according to his own will, is grounded on his having "reason", which is able to instruct him in that law he is to govern himself by, and make him know how far he is left to the freedom of his own will.
We, each of us, all are limited to our own rights, we cannot invade the inalienable rights of others.
Nor can one accept willful violation or relinquishment of another persons rights; as this would be Voluntary slavery; as James Madison clearly acknowledges.
Where one may believe that he or she can relinquish their own essential natural rights, it is in fact voluntary slavery;
The action is not one of Freedom, but of a willful and voluntary subjugation to another.
Anyone who attempts to accept that person's essential natural right, for any reason, has in effect engaged in slavery.
Each has placed his own freedom in peril by his actions:
The Constitution of the United States:
Amendment XIII
[Proposed 1865; Ratified 1865]
Section. 1. Neither "slavery" nor "involuntary servitude", except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Declaration of Independence:
That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
----------------------
The limiting factors in a free country would be this:
Where one may be willing to give freely, it is illegal and against freedoms laws for another to accept.
Wereone attempts to market for profit of any kind from this voluntary subjugationor voluntary slavery, it is the wholesale marketing of the crime againsthumanity, against the laws of nature, against God's liberties.
Such shall be deemed bythese facts slavery and rendered illegal by the obvious crime against nature,freedom and the laws of a free country.
----------------------
This is the basis of crimes against natures laws, against the laws that natures God entitle them, against the laws of freedom and the basis and definition of the crime of slavery.
FreedomsLaws of nature and laws that natures God entitle them, allows for personalchoice but disallows others to accept that persons voluntary relinquishmentof his or her own inalienable rights into slavery.
3.) Protection of Inalienable Rights
Thisis the bases by which the Oregon Patriot Party will actively pursue billsthat will limit, hinder and prosecute the markets which deal in slavery ofthis kind in our state:
The wholesale marketing of inalienable rightsor distribution of such materials that actively engage in such trade forprofit will be abolished.
Where freedom of the press will not behampered, the activities, products which promote and persons who profit inthe market in our state, will be actively pursued to immediately desist;and if such acts and promotion of slavery concerning these inalienable rightsare not halted, those persons will be punished with time.
To protectprivacy, but also to promote local community laws that allow greater powersto victims in civil courts to prosecute sodomy and past indoctrination ofthe innocent so to create an unfavorable atmosphere for those who misuse,deal in and market the destruction human lives.
Local Laws based onthe above will set precedence; Maintaining that citizens, local communities,county and state governments have the responsibility in preserving standardsof decency in America. This is a local community, county and state powerto regulate the crimes of slavery, voluntary slavery, sodomy and prostitution
-----------------------------------------------------
Of the three involved in the activity:
1.) Those who mistakenly attempt to give up their inalienable right;
2.) Those who market illegally inalienable rights and
3.) Those through natural curiosity partake of the product or activity;
It is those (2) who market that bear the greatest crime.
For without their participation to promote or market, few or none would find cause, product or effect.
4.) Unnatural Acts and Protections of the Freedom of Choice:
Onesuch misconception by some homosexual groups is the attempt to present thata free society as being built to allow unnatural activity against the wishesof others;
And not only to be simply allowed, but also to force theirassociation of themselves and unnatural habits with others in the publicand in the work place and on employers.
This would be involuntary servitude,forcing a person to serve another, whom he wishes not to serve, with either- attention, company, companionship, work condition, association or employment.
--------------------
Involuntary servitude is illegal in a free country:
--------------------
The Constitution of the United States:
Amendment XIII
[Proposed 1865; Ratified 1865]
Section. 1. Neither "slavery" nor "involuntary servitude", except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
----------------
A.) Prohibits Slavery and Involuntary Servitude of any kind, even for a employer to be forced to serve an "employee".
B.) This invokes the Inalienable Right of "The Freedom of Choice"
C.) Allows for Congress to enforce by "appropriate legislation"
----------------
As presented above, the fact that one gives up his natural rights, does not allow others to partake of "the supposed relinquishment" of those rights that are in fact inalienable, in any way, any unnatural way or for gain.
To be "secure in ones person, papers and effects" is an inalienable right.
There is no security in ones person in relation to slavery of any kind.
Normust others be forced to associate with those actively and openly engagingor declaring their involvement in such acts of slavery where one or moreparticipants gives up natural rights to another; or of and between each otherin an unnatural activity.
Such attempts to force ones will upon anyone or an employer are baseless,especially when an employer's wishes are simply not to have such participantsof immorality around or have themselves or their company associated withthem.
This is the freedom of choice.
----------
Prejudice is to pre - judge another by his or her race, religion, or gender or things which no person has the power over;
Prejudiceis in no way associated with willful, obvious, openly announced or discovered"bad habits" on or off the job of any kind.
Especially of People who have all the physical equipment, have the ability to use it correctly, and use it as nature intended,
..... then willfully and voluntarily >>> choose >>>>> NOT TO.
It is here a measure of "willful insanity by choice" by those engaging in such behavior, when a person or persons present this as a habitual continual establishment of one of their life's goals and further attempts to indoctrinate others and or market the same.
5.) Defending the Freedom of Choice of the Employer and Citizens:
Being an unnatural act, relinquishment of essential natural rights and a bad habit, to what do we compare it with in the work place.
Lets look at the problem in a way everyone can get a clear perspective of what is really occurring here.
We will humorously but seriously compare this to something we can comfortably relate to;
Further, to present the fallacy of elevating "bad habits", for which an individual has the physical ability to act as nature intended but has chosen not to; into some type of lifestyle, political establishment or enforceable right.
Theconsequence being equal to a person who declares he was born with the mentaltendency to rob banks, so society must make available banks for which he may rob them of their value, dignity and security.
------------- Perspective -----------
To get a real perspective of what is happening, we will relate "Bad Habits within and the Workplace" to the obvious marketers and participators of the above mentioned insanities..
We will entitle this comparison as:
The Nose Pickers Association of America:
Now everyone, on occasion, may pick ones own nose.
Thisis natural and not taken as a serious trait or habit done occasionally, brieflyor discreetly or in the privacy of ones home.
However, if doneto a point which is beyond the point of good taste, and continually, as abad habit in the work place, it can be grounds to be reprimanded, or if continued,fired from ones job.
--------
Now lets say an employee, Joe the Nose Picker, decides its his right to pick his nose any time he wishes;
Instead of correcting his bad habit, ....
Joethe Nose Picker decides to create "The Nose Pickers Association of America"where he and others pick their noses after work and on weekends.
They then go National an soon a good number of people gather to pick their noses.
TheEmployer of Joe the Nose Picker finds out that Joe involves himself in theorganization of this bad habit and tells Joe the Nose Picker he must quithis involvement with this organization because:
1.) he does not like bad unnatural habits
2.) believes that picking ones nose continually is a mental illness, unnatural, a level of insanity and a sickness.
3.) believes it hurts his companies image to have a employee that openly involves himself in such activity.
Joe the Noes Picker is adamant and refuses to quit The Nose pickers Association of America;
and flatly refuses to quit his bad habit,
And Joe the Noes Picker is promptly fired.
Furiousof being reprimanded, Joe goes to The Nose Pickers Association of Americaand begins taking steps to make his and other employers hire him regardlessof their bad habit.
The Nose Pickers Association of America now not only gathers people who pick their own noses;
But begin to gather those to enjoy picking each others noses:
Manto women, women to man, man to man, women to woman, woman to girl, man toboy, man to animal, woman to animal, man to object, woman to object, twomen to one women, etc.
Joe the Nose Picker then lobbies politicalparties to pass legislation to force Joe's ex-employer to hire him back andinsure that all other employers must accept The Nose Pickers Associationof America's after work and weekend habits.
The Nose Pickers Associationof America proclaims habitual picking of ones and others noses is not a badhabit but a respectable ....
"Lifestyle" .....
Further theNose Pickers Association of America declares they were born that way andit is perfectly normal to pick other peoples noses of others, the same sex,dogs etc.
A lifestyle that everyone must accept, or be labeled prejudice, fined and sued.
TheNose Pickers Association of America proclaims that nose picking is a geneticallyacquired trait and they can't help themselves;
Therefor even thoughthey have the right equipment to use Kleenex only when needed, choice tobe discreet and the ability not to pick their nose;
They argue (intheir growing insanity) that the genetic demand upon them is so great thatthey must pick theirs and even other peoples noses.
The Nose PickersAssociation of America then finds sympathetic doctors and members of theirnose picking group that are in government political positions to lobby andwrite bills.
Laws are passed.
Joe's ex-employerrefuses to comply with the laws and is promptly sued, other companies fearretribution and begin complying with the new laws.......
6.) Marketing of Insanity:
-------- Nose Pickers Association of America Part 2 --------
Themajority of the public is in a quandary on how to deal with such a onslotof perverse unnatural acts and hopes it is simply a fad that will simplygo away.
The Nose Pickers Association of America has different ideas however;
Theyare now a Nonprofit Organization and are dependent on the benefits of selfcreated jobs of this status from donations, and taxpayer incentives and continueto promote materials that stir up turmoil.
And The Nose Pickers Associationof America begins to recruit closet nose pickers, and part time nose pickersand even those who have only picked their nose once or twice by convincingthem that they have no choice because they are genetically born that way.
Many disillusioned nose pickers fall into the organization.
Theyalso begin a campaign to indoctrinate the young, the weak at mind,the lonely and disgruntled, that feel the need to be accepted.
THEIR MOTTO:
Join the The Nose Pickers Association of America, we care if nobody else cares.
Theybegin to film adamant nose pickers and distribute via VCR, DVD, cable TVand Internet Quicktime movies of them to brainwash and indoctrinate moreof the same selling it as normal and acceptable.
Selling titles such as "Nose Pickers in Bondage" and "Deep Nostril"
TheNose Pickers Association of America begin to sell pretty rainbow coloredbumper stickers to sell their bad habit; just as "Joe the Camel" isused to sell cigarettes to children to entice them into the addiction ofa unhealthful habit of smoking.
Millions of dollars are made and themarketing scheme selling cable movies packaged with other family rated moviesand The Membership of the Nose Pickers Association of America increases.
National parades ensue and they pronounce National Nose Pickers Day.
Organizedcrime gets involved around the world seeing the profits of nose picker slavery,nose rape films, nose porno and many other deviations such as extortion ofmoney of those who have fell into their traps and try to leave without paying.
Sincethere is no crime in anyone over 18 involving themselves in their schemesthey have the young and naive state that they are 18 years of age on beforethe act of picking their nose;
Even though they have no idea of thefact their entire life is ruined by their short lived actions that will beviewed forever through the Nose Pickers Association of America marketingmachine
Many are resolved to remain, never having a normal life;
Others commit suicide after realizing what they have done and seeing no hope after being labeled a "once nose picker";
A few just realized they were duped and learn to start anew.
Organized crime uses technology and location in foreign countries to conceal and evade law efforts on the criminal end;
Andalso twist the 1st amendment right to advocate their criminal and damagingactivities which consume the same unwary and continue corrupting the country.
-------- Nose Pickers Association of America Part 3 --------
The public watches helplessly not knowing what steps to take.
Their knowledge of their rights as Americans are lacking;
They are unwilling to stand up and make a stand.
Their representatives are weak and indecisive on what to do.
Thecriminals take advantage of the situation as the Nose Pickers Associationof America Profits from their Nonprofit status and donations from their marketingcampaigns.
America is held hostage from growing damaging corruption and insanity that prays on the naive..
7.) Solution to the Dilemma
It is clear that most Americans have forgot the reasons for local and states powers not granted or prohibited to the federal government are left to the states and to the people.
US Constitution - Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Nothingin the Constitution prohibits very local and state legislators from enactingcommon law based on the obvious laws of nature, nor to regulate marketingof such products, criminal activities and indoctrination.
John Locke Essay on Toleration:"...In the next place: As the magistrate has no power to impose by his lawsthe use of any rites and ceremonies in any Church, so neither has he anypower to forbid the use of such rites and ceremonies as are already received,approved, and practiced by any Church; because, if he did so, he would destroythe Church itself: the end of whose institution is only to worship God withfreedom after its own manner.
You will say, by this rule,if some congregations should have a mind to sacrifice infants, or (as theprimitive Christians were falsely accused) lustfully pollute themselves inpromiscuous uncleanness, or practice any other such "heinous enormities",is the magistrate obliged to tolerate them, because they are committed ina religious assembly? I answer: No. These things are "not lawful" in the "ordinary course of life", "nor in any private house"; and therefore "neither are they so in the worship of God, or in any religious meeting"."
John Locke 8: "...In transgressing the law of Nature, the offender declares himself to live by another rule than that of reason and common equity, which is that measure God has set to the actions of men for their mutual security, and so he becomes dangerous to mankind;..."
TheDeclaration of Independence and Constitution is not created to allow eitherour governments or our citizens to be held hostage by obvious criminallymotivated and marketed insanity.
The people have the right to secure their own happiness, and with the laws of nature and natures God entitle them.
Sanity of a mind established by the laws of nature and of natures God is an inalienable right.
True Liberty is defined in the Absolute Rights of the Colonists, 1772:
"Just and true liberty, equal and impartial liberty" in matters spiritual and temporal, is a thing that all Men are clearly entitled to, by the eternal and immutable laws Of God and nature, as well as by the law of Nations, & all well grounded municipal laws, which "must" have their foundation in the "former".--"
8.) Laws that use Reverse Prejudice
Read these Documents
TheConstitution defines limits on the Federal government, not local governmentsregarding obvious corruption of the simple laws of nature and common sense.
The Constitution declares acknowledgment of rights;
But the Constitution's purpose also is to limit the powers of the Federal Government.
Those things that are not limited or granted are reserved for the States and the People.
Thomas Jefferson says of rights, liberty, limits and law:
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to "our will" within "limits" drawn around us by the "equal rights" of others.
I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it "violates" the "rights" of the individual. ~~"
Lawsthat use reverse prejudice; Of a sort that forces others to do, orassociate themselves with, people that do or act in ways they don't wantto be associated with for what ever reason; is in direct violation of theequal rights of any individual to be secure in ones person, papers and effects (property).
Forcing someone through LAW to accept the bad habits or actions of others, breaks through those limits drawn around each of us and invades and Violates the rights of another individual.
You may have a right to act stupid or unnatural, but no one and no government has a right to force acceptance of that stupidity on others.
This,when in fact, the Founding Fathers and nearly the entire public at that timethe country and freedom was created would have hung most any man or womanthat violated another person in such a way, or tried to profit from thosethings, as it was clearly not what was intended by the laws they had placedto protect the common good of society based upon nature and the laws of Godby which they often referred.
Natures laws and Morality is not presentedjust by the Bible, but also from the repetitive time tested lessons throughoutall of time.
It is simply a fact:
John Locke 10. Besides the crime which consists in violating the laws, and varying from the right rule of reason, whereby a man so far becomes degenerate, and declares himself to quit the principles of human nature and to be a noxious creature, there is commonly injury done, and some person or other, some other man, receives damage by his transgression; in which case, he who hath received any damage has (besides the right of punishment common to him, with other men) a particular right to seek reparation from him that hath done it. And anyother person who finds it just may also join with him that is injured, andassist him in recovering from the offender so much as may make satisfactionfor the harm he hath suffered.
John Locke 11.From these two distinct rights (the one of punishing the crime, for restraintand preventing the like offence, which right of punishing is in everybody,the other of taking reparation, which belongs only to the injured party)comesit to pass that the magistrate, who by being magistrate hath the common rightof punishing put into his hands, can often, where the public good demandsnot the execution of the law, remit the punishment of "criminal offences"by his own authority,but yet cannot remit the satisfaction due to any private man for the damagehe has received. That he who hath suffered the damage has a right to demandin his own name, and he alone can remit. The damnified person has this powerof appropriating to himself the goods or service of the offender by rightof self-preservation, as every man has a power to punish the crime toprevent its being committed again, by the right he has of preserving allmankind, and doing all reasonable things he can in order to that end. And thus it is that every man in the state of Nature has a power to kill a murderer, both to deter others from doing the like injury (which no reparation can compensate) by the example of the punishment that attends it from everybody, and also to secure men from the attempts of a criminal who, having renounced reason, the common rule and measure God hath given to mankind, hath, by the unjust violence and slaughter he hath committed upon one, declared war against all mankind, and therefore may be destroyed as a lion or a tiger, one of those wild savage beasts with whom men can have no society nor security. And upon this is grounded that great law of nature, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed."And Cain was so fully convinced that every one had a right to destroy sucha criminal, that, after the murder of his brother, he cries out, "Every onethat findeth me shall slay me," so plain was it writ in the hearts of allmankind.
John Locke 12. By the same reason may a man in the state of Nature punish the lesser breaches of that law, it will, perhaps, be demanded, with death? I answer: Each transgression may be punished to that degree,and with so much severity, as will suffice to make it an ill bargain to theoffender, give him cause to repent, and terrify others from doing the like.Every offence that can be committed in the state of Nature may, in the stateof Nature, be also punished equally, and as far forth, as it may, in a commonwealth.Forthough it would be beside my present purpose to enter here into the particularsof the law of Nature, or its measures of punishment, yet it is certain thereis such a law, and that too as intelligible and plain to a rational creatureand a studier of that law as the positive laws of commonwealths, nay, possiblyplainer; as much as reason is easier to be understood than the fancies and intricate contrivances of men, following contrary and hidden interests put into words; for truly so are a great part of the municipal laws of countries, which are only so far right as they are founded on the law of Nature, by which they are to be regulated and interpreted.
John Locke 13. To this strange doctrine -- viz., That in the state of Nature every one has the executive power of the law of Nature-- I doubt not but it will be objected that it is unreasonable for men tobe judges in their own cases, that self-love will make men partial to themselvesand their friends; and, on the other side, ill-nature, passion, and revengewill carry them too far in punishing others, and hence nothing but confusionand disorder will follow, and that therefore God hath certainly appointedgovernment to restrain the partiality and violence of men. I easily grantthat civil government is the proper remedy for the inconveniences of the state of Nature,which must certainly be great where men may be judges in their own case,since it is easy to be imagined that he who was so unjust as to do his brotheran injury will scarce be so just as to condemn himself for it. But I shalldesire those who make this objection to remember that absolute monarchs are but men; and if government is to be the remedy of those evils which necessarily follow from men being judges in their own cases, and the state of Nature is therefore not to be endured, I desire to know what kind of government that is, and how much better it is than the state of Nature, where one man commanding a multitude has the liberty to be judge in his own case, and may do to all his subjects whatever he pleases without the least question or control of those who execute his pleasure? and in whatsoever he doth, whether led by reason, mistake, or passion, must be submitted to?which men in the state of Nature are not bound to do one to another. Andif he that judges, judges amiss in his own or any other case, he is answerable for it to the rest of mankind.
John Locke 14. It is often asked as a mighty objection, where are, or ever were, there any men in such a state of Nature?To which it may suffice as an answer at present, that since all princes andrulers of "independent" governments all through the world are in a state of Nature, it is plain the world never was, nor never will be, without numbers of men in that state. I have named "all governors" of "independent" communities, "whether they are, or are not, in league with others"; for it is not every compact that puts an end to the state of Nature between men, but only this one of agreeing together mutually to enter into one community, and make one body politic; other promises and compacts men may make one with another, and yet still be in the state of Nature.The promises and bargains for truck, etc., between the two men in Soldania,in or between a Swiss and an Indian, in the woods of America, are binding to them, though they are perfectly in a state of Nature in reference to one another for truth, and keeping of faith belongs to men as men, and not as members of society.
John Locke 15.To those that say there were never any men in the state of Nature, I willnot oppose the authority of the judicious Hooker (Eccl. Pol. i. 10), wherehe says, "the laws which have been hitherto mentioned" -- i.e., thelaws of Nature -- "do bind men absolutely, even as they are men, althoughthey have never any settled fellowship, never any solemn agreement amongstthemselves what to do or not to do; but for as much as we are notby ourselves sufficient to furnish ourselves with competent store of thingsneedful for such a life as our Nature doth desire, a life fit for the dignity of man, therefore to supply those defects and imperfections which are in us,as living single and solely by ourselves, we are naturally induced to seekcommunion and fellowship with others; this was the cause of men uniting themselvesas first in politic societies." But I, moreover, affirm that all menare naturally in that state, and remain so till, by their own consents, theymake themselves members of some politic society, and I doubt not, in the sequel of this discourse, to make it very clear."...
To say that this much history is not being a valid time tested lesson on something so basic, is nothing short of "staged ignorance".
One ``freedom" that is ironically ignored in this country is the freedom for all to choose.
That should mean the ``freedom of choice" to say ``I want nothing to do with that person".
But as soon as anyone says this, they are deemed ``prejudice"; Even though their opinion is based on a known and openly established, announced unnatural actions and behavior of another, whose actions are offensive to him, his family, friends and others around him he associates and does business with.
Then, the same persons that cry prejudice turnto force others to accept not only their unnatural behavior, but also theirbad habits to be associated with others lives and others businesses;
And thereby attempt to force their acquaintance upon others who see clearly their openly announced perverse behavior and want nothing to do with them, nor any association with them;
A one way street for the corrupt.
What is really ironic is that those people that fight against such morality, depend fully on the source of that same morality to protect them in other areas of life;
Forinstance killing someone without cause of defense, is presented as a crime;but what if there were no morals to prevent this? For what distinguishesthat each man as having a special individual equal right to life but God'sword that declares and dictates this, as well as to all laws of morality;
Their argument is that they hurt only themselves ....but then go out and involve, recruit and corrupt others.
Aman that does these activities, is always looking to others to defend theirfoolish mistakes/views/unnatural habits and/or to make profit from them inorder to further legitimize their poor actions and ridiculously foolish habits.
JohnLocke covers this in his writings with regard to "Toleration" and his statementsare repeated by Samuel Adams in the Absolute Rights of the Colonists, 1772:
John Locke Essay on Toleration:"...In the next place: As the magistrate has no power to impose by his lawsthe use of any rites and ceremonies in any Church, so neither has he anypower to forbid the use of such rites and ceremonies as are already received,approved, and practiced by any Church; because, if he did so, he would destroythe Church itself: the end of whose institution is only to worship God withfreedom after its own manner.
You will say, by this rule, if somecongregations should have a mind to sacrifice infants, or (as the primitiveChristians were falsely accused) lustfully pollute themselves in promiscuousuncleanness, or practice any other such "heinous enormities", is the magistrate obliged to tolerate them, because they are committed in a religious assembly? I answer: No. These things are "not lawful" in the "ordinary course of life", "nor in any private house"; and therefore "neither are they so in the worship of God, or in any religious meeting"."
Dictionary: enormity - enormities. 1. The quality of passing all moral bounds; excessive wickedness or outrageousness.
Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772
"Ifmen through fear, fraud or mistake, should "in terms" renounce and give upany essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great endof society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedombeing the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienatethis gift, and "voluntarily" become a slave."
This establishing that one cannot give up ones life or any essential natural right defined by God or Nature.
John Locke 6. But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is "not" a "state of licence"; though man in that state have an uncontrollable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some "nobler use" than its bare preservation calls for it. The state of Nature has a law of Nature to "govern it", which "obliges every one", and "reason", which "is" that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it,that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in hislife, health, liberty or possessions; for men being all the workmanship ofone omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker; all the servants of one sovereignMaster, sent into the world by His order and about His business; they areHis property, whose workmanship they are made to last during His, not oneanother's pleasure.
John Locke 21. Freedom, then, is "not"what Sir Robert Filmer tells us: "A liberty for every one to do what he lists,to live as he pleases, and not to be tied by any laws"; but freedom of menunder government is to have a "standing rule" to live by, common to "everyone" of that society, and made by the legislative power erected in it. Aliberty to follow my own will in all things where that "rule" prescribesnot, not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary willof another man, as freedom of nature is to be under no other "restraint">>>"but" the "law of Nature"."<<<
John Locke 57." ...Could they be happier without it, the law, as a useless thing, wouldof itself vanish; and that ill deserves the name of confinement which hedgesus in only from bogs and precipices. So that however it may be mistaken,the end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlargefreedom. For in all the states of created beings, capable of laws, where there is "no law" "there is no freedom". For liberty is to be free from restraint (APP Note see Locke 21: "but from that of the Laws of Nature") and violence from others, which cannot be where there is no law; and is "not", as we are told, "a liberty for every man to do what he lists."
Forwho could be free, when every other man's humour might domineer over him?But a liberty to dispose and order freely as he lists his person, actions,possessions, and his whole property "within the allowance of those laws" under "which he is", and therein not to be subject to the "arbitrary will" of another, but freely follow his own."
Wherefreedom insures an individuals right to privacy, even to include someoneelse's rights who wish to engage willingly in foolish actions with them;Wholesale distribution to those not already corrupted, for gain, profit orrecruitment of such immoral activities, that are in fact ``morally" and ``mentally"damaging, are not protected. Nor is other forms of corrupt brainwashing.
Ifthey were, it would be a freedom to willfully harm others with that whichhas been documented throughout time as causing such a corruption and damage.
The damage not only to the laws of nature, freedom and against Godslaws, but also clearly damaging to mans mental strength and spiritual wellness;and no country can stand strong if it has wholly corrupted itself.
Samuel Adams:
"Liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals."
"As long as the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader....
If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved.
This will be their great security ."
Ina free country education of the Laws of Nature and of which Natures God entitlethem are essential lessons to be learned and a rule to be upheld by onesself; as freedom imposes upon each individual one law to survive.
Thatone law, is individual responsibility to uphold natures laws and the lawsthat natures God entitle him and and his interaction with others.
Eachindividual in this country is a king, and we cannot avert our responsibilitiesto others or to the government or any ruler.
You alone are responsible for your actions.
9.) Reducing and Correcting the Atmosphere of Folly:
Nature, Age, Natural desire, Marriage, Family and Social Education demands of society.
Parents responsibilities and powers.
Individual responsibilities.
10.) Learning the lessons of life quickly within ones lifetime:
A interest note: All of the Founding Fathers gave thanks to God (of the bible) and prayed to God each time they gathered.
George Washington:
"[W]e ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven, can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.
True Liberty is defined in the Absolute Rights of the Colonists, 1772:
"Just and true liberty, equal and impartial liberty" in matters spiritual and temporal, is a thing that all Men are clearly entitled to, by the eternal and immutable laws Of God and nature, as well as by the law of Nations, & all well grounded municipal laws, which "must" have their foundation in the "former".--"
John Locke 135: "Thus the "law of Nature" stands as an "eternal rule" to "all men", "legislators" as well as others.
The rules that they make for, other men's actions must, as well as their own and other men's actions,
be "conformable" to the "law of Nature" -- i.e., "to" the "will" of "God",
of which that is a >>> "declaration", <<<
and the fundamental "law of Nature" being the "preservation of mankind",
>>>"no" human sanction can be good or valid against it.<<<"
|
