Defending Life, Liberty, and the Constitutional Right to own Private Property
Jan 31, 2012
Rick Santorum, unalienable rights, and conservatism
Another moment that stands out in my mind was when Santorum quoted
the inalienable rights section of the Declaration of Independence as being
foundational to the Constitution if not part of the legislation itself and the
US Constitution is the law of the land. Laws are defined by the words in the
statutes not by what isn't mentioned. which is why the founders were so careful to avoid specificity in
areas of the law that would have to be decided by the citizens in the
individual states during future generations. I've always felt that the genious of the Constitution was not in what it said but by what it didn't say. Anyway....
Belief in inalienable rights is the primary difference
between true conservatives and progressives in both the Democrat and the Republican
party and it occurred to me as I contemplated Santorum’s words and related it
to conservatism.
“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”
An analogy from today’s world of computer software is
helpful to see the relationship between the Consitution and the Inalienable
rights section that really led to the addition of the Bill of Rights, I
believe. Santorum referred to the Constitution as the users manual, which is an
a interesting way to refer to the legal framework that holds our Federal
Government together.
Now I would like to take the analogy a little further and
apply it to todays computer technology systems. In other words, if the
constitution is the users manual for a software program, then the Declaration
of Independence is the operating system that has to be in place first, like the
Microsoft Windows XP or Vista , or the
application will be inoperable.
A computer application is useless without an operating
system and so is the US Constitution without an understanding of the inalienable
rights that come from “our Creator”.
That the founding fathers were Conservatives, I have no
doubt, and therefore the operating system for their government matches the same
principles that identify conservatism today.
Ronald Reagan spoke of the three legs of the conservative
stool, being fiscal conservatism, national security, and social conservatism.
Each leg is intertwined with the unalienable rights
mentioned in the Declaration of Independence as follows:
1) Life
is obviously affected by national security conservatism and social conservatism,
but it’s also affected by fiscal
conservatism. One cannot survive without a means to participate in the economic
activity necessary to purchase food, clothing, shelter, and even health care.
2) Liberty
3) The
pursuit of happiness is another unalienable right that distinguishes our system
of government from socialism. Socialism depends on the liberal code words of “fairness”
and “redistribution” of income which demands “equality” in a utopian society characterized
not by individuals seeking happiness but those immersed in misery, because
liberalism in all it’s forms simply doesn’t work..
So now that I’ve buried the lead, I’ll say that
conservatives believe in “unalienable” rights and liberals are inclined to
downplay or even deny that part of the Declaration of Independence. A recent
appointee to the US Supreme Court, Elena Kagen admitted she did not believe our
Constitution allowed for it, which is like trying to use Microsoft Word on the
Unix operating system, which will render your computer useless except as a
clothes hanger.
Those that refer to themselves as strict constitutionalists without accepting the foundation of unalienable rights are just as guilty as liberals who are inclined to believe in a living constitution that changes at the whim of activist judges.
Other less tangible but no less motivating unalienable
rights that trace their roots to our Judaeo/Christian heritage include faith,
hope, and charity (love) which are also found in the writings of the founding
fathers.
One of the characteristics of an unalienable right is that
it will not cancel another unalienable right if exercised. For example Franklin
Roosevelt authored a “new bill of rights” that included jobs and healthcare.
But the problem with this was these so called rights depended on confiscating
the hard earned property (money) others have earned by maximizing the talents,
creativity, and opportunities that a person has to work with. In the book of
Genesis man was commanded by God to be fruitful, multiply and subdue the Earth,
and those Biblically mandated truths shared with us long ago via the pen of Moses by a loving and merciful God are still applicable today, whether one
believes it or not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The scientific proof of our unalienable Rights is at hand. The book titled: “Scientific Proof of Our Unalienable Rights. A Road to Utopia” by Michael T. Takac is now available on: www.amazon.com and www.barnesandnoble.com.
ReplyDelete