Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ZULU
The radical libertarians have come crawling out of their holes to attack you on this one.

Actually, I think they are better termed "conservatives". Those are the ones who foolishly think the rights of individuals are paramount and should not be trampled on by the state. Leftists generally view the state as supreme and it is the state that grants rights to its citizens. I'll go with the former.

The fact that this law was on the books for 200 years AS WELL AS SIMILAR laws all over the nation, indicates that the Founding Fathers who WROTE our Constitution had no problem with them.

200 years ago, we had slavery and Women had few if any rights. Religious tests though unconstitutional were the law in many states. The founding fathers gave us a Constitution that allowed for continued improvement of our Nation and society.

But our radical liberal courts, with some help from the anti-western ACLU, suddenly "discvovered" a new right - the right to live like swine.

The 6 million couples living together outside of marriage hardly compare with the 2 1/2 to 3 million divorces annually, which directly and negatively impact over a million children annually. So the definition of swine may have to be greatly expanded.

Idiotic decisions by Federal Courts like this one are indeed contributing to the collapse of western civilization.

Perhaps they understand that true liberty means free choices, which at times will be the wrong choices. But that is the basis of freedom...the freedom to make a bad choice.

42 posted on 07/20/2006 11:49:52 AM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: MACVSOG68

'Actually, I think they are better termed "conservatives". Those are the ones who foolishly think the rights of individuals are paramount and should not be trampled on by the state. Leftists generally view the state as supreme and it is the state that grants rights to its citizens. I'll go with the former.'

People who believe that the rights of individuals are always paramount are not libertarians, they are anarchists.
In any civilized society, the state has a right to establish certain social norms and standards.

Libertarians oppose a military draft and oppose immigration laws. The Founding Fathers had no problem with military conscription, and I doubt if they would have approved of the incremental invasion of America by Mexico.

"200 years ago, we had slavery and Women had few if any rights. Religious tests though unconstitutional were the law in many states. The founding fathers gave us a Constitution that allowed for continued improvement of our Nation and society."

200 years ago slavery was legal and constitutional, although certainly inconsistent with the founding principles of America which is why it was ulimately eliminated. Women had no rights as it was a male dominated world. Progess advances incrementally - as does decay.
The Founding Fathers did give us a Constitution which contains within itself a mechanism for improvement, but that same mechanism can be abused in the wrong hands.

"The 6 million couples living together outside of marriage hardly compare with the 2 1/2 to 3 million divorces annually, which directly and negatively impact over a million children annually. So the definition of swine may have to be greatly expanded."

At least the 2.5 million people who divorced made an attempt at marriage. And of those 6 million people who live together and produce offspring, their partnerships are far more likely to frgament than those of people who are married. Individuals who are given to instant gratification lack the dedication and self-discipline which is necessary to make a successful marriage work. And they produce the offspring which create the societal problems we see all about us as these children have no role models, no direction, no sense of family honor, no self-discipline or self respect, and become a burden rather than an asset to society.

"Perhaps they understand that true liberty means free choices, which at times will be the wrong choices. But that is the basis of freedom...the freedom to make a bad choice."

True liberty does mean the freedom to make bad choices - as long as the consequences of those bad choices are born by the indidivuals who make the bad choices. When people choose to live together outside marriage the ultimate consequences are children and society ulitmately bears the burden of dealing with the problems these children generate.





53 posted on 07/20/2006 1:32:21 PM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: MACVSOG68
Actually, I think they are better termed "conservatives". Those are the ones who foolishly think the rights of individuals are paramount and should not be trampled on by the state. Leftists generally view the state as supreme and it is the state that grants rights to its citizens. I'll go with the former.

The very people who wrote the Constitution endorsed laws like NC's Cohabitation Statute. They endorsed and understood as Constitutional laws that prohibited Adultery, Fornication and other immoral acts. They understood that a people cannot be free if they are immoral. They drew upon people like Edmund Burke, who stated:

Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their appetites in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.

200 years ago, we had slavery and Women had few if any rights. Religious tests though unconstitutional were the law in many states. The founding fathers gave us a Constitution that allowed for continued improvement of our Nation and society.

How nice, another libertine endorses the leftist Statist position of a "living constitution", one that places the power in the hands of the judiciary rather than the people.

When are libertines going to realize that the "living constitution" theory is more dangerous to them, as they don't just get to pick and choose when it's used. Sure, you like the "living constitution" theory when it endorses your various hedonistic perversions, yet when those same judges use the "living constitution" to say that you no longer have a right to own guns, you scream. Guess what, you can't have it both ways.

Either the Constitution means what it says, and means what it ment when the framers wrote it, or it means whatever the judicial oligarchy says it means. Which means they are your new rulers. Bow down and worship.

I hate to break it to you:

"[W]hen a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under the government of individual men, who for the time being have power to declare what the Constitution is, according to their own views of what it ought to mean." Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393, 621 (1857) (Curtis, J., dissenting).

Further, "The Constitution is a written instrument. As such its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when adopted, it means now." The State of South Carolina v. United States 199 U.S. 437 (1905).

The pathetic libertine attempts to drag up slavery are so foolish they shouldn't be addressed. Slavery was fixed with the Amendment process. As George Washington Stated:

If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.

The 6 million couples living together outside of marriage hardly compare with the 2 1/2 to 3 million divorces annually, which directly and negatively impact over a million children annually. So the definition of swine may have to be greatly expanded.

Again with the divorce lie? Again, 50% of marriages DO NOT end in Divorce. But 90% of Cohabitating couples do not last more than 5 years together.

Perhaps they understand that true liberty means free choices, which at times will be the wrong choices. But that is the basis of freedom...the freedom to make a bad choice.

You don't have the freedom to destroy the moral fabric of society.

116 posted on 07/20/2006 8:39:27 PM PDT by ghostmonkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: MACVSOG68

A great post and we agree very much. I especially find your last two lines to be well put.

"Perhaps they understand that true liberty means free choices, which at times will be the wrong choices. But that is the basis of freedom...the freedom to make a bad choice."


137 posted on 07/21/2006 5:12:36 AM PDT by SmoothTalker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson