Part of the problem is that most Americans don't understand what a right is. A right is not a guarantee that the government (i.e., other people) will provide you something for free. We have the right to engage in religious expression, but that doesn't mean that the government pays for the construction of the church. We have the right to peacefully assemble, but the government doesn't promise to supply your transportation. You have the right to keep and bear arms, but don't expect the government to provide you with a free firearm and bullets. You have the right to free speech, but the government won't grant you free radio or TV air time.
What makes something a right is not whether the government can force somebody else to pay for it. What defines something as a right is whether the government can or cannot prohibit you from doing it. (President Obama notoriously called these "negative liberties".) If the government can't stop you from doing it, then it's a right.
We have a right to religious expression because the government is prohibited from suppressing that expression. We have the right to assemble because the government must allow us to do so. We can speak freely because the government cannot censor us. Nor can the government take away law-abiding citizens' firearms.
I believe that as Americans we're entitled to only three things: Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Free people who exercise these "inalienable" rights can achieve greatness. From these three "entitlements" spring all the elements that constitute abundance.
and we have the right to be hungry and homeless.
ReplyDeleteIt seems the more we wall ourselves off from the greed and sloth of the few, the more hardened we become to spirit of this generous and caring nation
I'm not a big fan of Glenn Beck, but here's one thing he said that I've been pondering:
ReplyDeleteIn 1887, Congress passed a bill appropriating money to Texas farmers who were suffering through a catastrophic drought.
Here's how he answered Congress' request:
"I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan, as proposed by this bill, to indulge a benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds for that purpose. I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit..."
Cleveland (who was a Democrat!) turned out to be a hundred percent right. Those "fellowcitizens" he put so much trust in donated ten times more money to those farmers than the amount the president had vetoed, once again proving that when individuals personally sacrifice to help each other, it not only makes us better people, it makes us a better country. It forces us to notice need instead of simply hiring corrupt politicians to notice it only when they can exploit, publicize, or politicize it.
Unfortunately, Cleveland's unwavering belief in the individual didn't last long. It was squashed just a few years after his second term when progressive Republican Teddy Roosevelt took over and said idiotic things like: "Every man holds his property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require it. FDR compounded this notion in the 1930's
I'm not advocating an immediate withdrawal to those times I do want us to move in that direction . Americans are the most generous people on earth. This generosity is being stifled by govt ie Obama wants to limit deductions to charity.