Calm down. Everything is under control. A dastardly criminal enterprise has been shut down. Get back to your normal lives knowing all is well in America.
In case you weren't aware of it, a California couple was doing something very improper in their home; something involving a group of people. The Fromms were cited under a municipal code in the city of San Juan Capistrano, California. When asked for comment, Stephanie Fromm said, "How dare they tell us we can’t have whatever we want in our home".
What type of debauchery was taking place at their home? They were holding a bible study. I know, there goes the neighborhood. Well, one of their neighbors, in an effort to preserve their house's value I assume, called in a complaint. The couple have been fined $300 and must now apply for a permit to allow three or more to meet in their home to avoid further $500 fines.
The Fromms live in a neighborhood with large homes and have a corral, barn, pool and huge back lawn on their property, so parking and noise aren’t a problem.
"There’s no singing or music,” Stephanie said. “It’s meditative.”
Well, thank God for that at least.
New Discovery Could Shake Scientific Consensus
Roll Over Gore: Pillar of Climate Change Challenged
Is Gore Wrong? Galactic Cosmic Radiation Says Yes
Cern Scientists Challenge Climate Change after Cosmic Rays test
CERN scratching head over Global Cosmic Radiation
Physics Shocker! The Sun controls cloud cover/global temperature
Climate Change Theory in a Spin as Cosmic Rays seed cloud formation
Wouldn't it have been great if the media would have been able to print accurate headlines like these just a few weeks ago following another CERN experiment (Click here for more info). But the politics of challenging the AGW position on Climate Change is too fraught with danger for science to be allowed its proper place.
But I must say that if challenging consensus is inappropriate in Climate Change, wouldn't it seemingly be out of the question when it comes to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity and his famous equation Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared. This "pillar of physics" says that nothing can move faster than the speed of light. Even now, most scientists are in disbelief. Notice though that no one is trying to shut down the discussion by saying the debate is over.
Yet below are the headlines declaring the results of CERN's recent experiment. The hypocrisy in the media is beyond belief.
Roll Over Einstein: Pillar of Physics Challenged
Was Einstein Wrong? Faster-Than-Light Neutrino Says Yes
Cern scientists challenge laws of physics after 'breaking' speed ...
CERN scratching head over speed of light
Physics shocker! Neutrinos clocked faster than light
Einstein's theory in a spin as neutrinos pass speed of light
Debate Reaction
The strongest reaction of the night came when I over-anticipated a Herman Cain talking point by yelling, "CHILEAN MODEL!" a little too enthusiastically while sitting next to the beautiful Dawn. Suffice it to say that I finished the remainder of the evening in solitude.
In small bits, one forgets that Newt Gingrich is unelectable. I would like to see him as the VP pick, if only to see him debate Biden into the ground.
Cain is also unelectable based on foreign policy issues, but I do like his $9.99 pizza deal.
Rick Santorum seems more like the regular guy than Rick Perry, so I'm not sure where Perry's strength is anymore. Bachmann is fading fast, while Huntsman should get his parting gift soon too. Gary Johnson one liner was unable to overcome Gary Johnson. I'm purposely leaving out Ron Paul. I wish these debates would too.
Wait, you forgot Romney. No, I didn't. Romney is still exactly the same as he's been since 2008 - good enough to get my vote over Obama, yet has done nothing to get my vote in a primary.
In case you didn't watch, here was Johnson's big line of the night.
"My next-door neighbor’s two dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than this current administration"
I hated the format of the debate. Too many candidates who didn't have a chance to answer each question. It's time to thin the herd and get down to business. How the impending collapse of our economy this week didn't come up is beyond me?
The Social Contract
Get ready for the new liberal talking point - The Social Contract. The Social Contract outlines the relationship between a people and its government. Our nation was founded on the Social Contract as espoused by John Locke. He recognized a Law of Nature (moral law) that man would live by on his own, but for man to live without fear of those who chose to act against this law, he would collectively consent to be governed.
This government would be a neutral party to protect what is outlined in our Declaration of Independence as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness of which property rights were a foundation. This goverment "derives it's power from the consent of the governed".
Locke argued that government's legitimacy comes from the citizens' delegation to the government of their right of self-preservation. The government thus acts as an impartial, objective agent of the people, rather than each man acting as his own judge, jury, and executioner--the condition that takes place in the absence of government.
Locke was the foremost authority on political philosophy with the majority of America's founders.
But when the left begin to speak of a social contract, don't be fooled. They do not refer to Locke, but to Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Whereas Locke's theory was about personal freedom and a government designed first and foremost to protect that freedom, Rousseau emphasized the collective over the individual.
[The social contract] can be reduced to the following terms: Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will; and in a body we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole.
Rousseau envisioned the government as the seat of power, rather than the individual. He thought that man often had "to be forced to be free" in that popular sovereignty was to decide what is good for the whole.
The Bill of Rights, is a direct repudiation of Rousseau's Social Contract and an embrace of Locke's.
So if you hear someone such as Paul Krugman or Elizabeth Warren say that the Social Contract means that one's property and/or it's proceeds, belong to society, the state or anyone other than the rightful owner, then understand what they are saying. They are expressing a desire to force upon us a popular-elected socialistic state rather than the representative government, free market society our founders intended.
They wish to wield the popular will of the masses against the minority, the Bill of Rights be damned. Today it is class warfare against the rich. Tomorrow, it will be the young against the elderly under Obamacare. Before one smugly exclaims "take from the wealthy", be sure to reflect upon how the Bill of Rights may one day be your sole refuge against the state when it turns its eye upon you.
They wish to wield the popular will of the masses against the minority, the Bill of Rights be damned. Today it is class warfare against the rich. Tomorrow, it will be the young against the elderly under Obamacare. Before one smugly exclaims "take from the wealthy", be sure to reflect upon how the Bill of Rights may one day be your sole refuge against the state when it turns its eye upon you.
Only under Rousseau's Social Contract could the state ever believe that it has the right to fine an individual for holding a quiet, orderly Bible study on that individual's own property.
Unfortunately, we currently have a president who agrees with them and is actively working to stir the masses for his own political gain. Taxes to pay for the roads and the military may flow from Locke. But taxes to take from one and give to another is not Locke. Its not Jefferson or Madison either. It's also not American.
Unfortunately, we currently have a president who agrees with them and is actively working to stir the masses for his own political gain. Taxes to pay for the roads and the military may flow from Locke. But taxes to take from one and give to another is not Locke. Its not Jefferson or Madison either. It's also not American.
No comments:
Post a Comment