MJ, Actually enjoyed the logic in this one though it left out the ever necessary point about "rule of law" and it application to all equally when there is no exception on the books.
On Feb 22, 7:07 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > "Is The State more important than your religious beliefs? ...more binding > than your marriage? You can divorce both -- give either a Dear John letter, > if you please. But you cannot break up with The State."February 19, 2013You > Should Be Able to "Dear John" The StateBy Jim Babka > Thomas Jefferson said that it was immoral to compel a man to furnish the > funds for that which he abhors. The State does exactly this on countless > issues. Can we ever grow beyond this? > The history of religious liberty teaches crucial lessons. > For example, a man named Tyndale was burned at the stake for distributing an > English language Bible. His goal to let the plough-boy read the scriptures > threatened the establishment’s monopoly control of information. > Another lesson is that most colonies had established church denominations, > paid for with tax dollars. Even "dissenters," were required to fund The State > Church. This colonial practice continued even AFTER we defeated the British. > Without those taxes the other side imagined anarchy and chaos."Why, if > there's no established church," they asked,"how shall we ensure the > development of moral character?" They claimed the decision to end state > support for churches was anti-religion and would lead to their demise. The > superabundance of houses of worship in virtually every city and village in > our country today illustrates that the opposite happened. The absence of the > tax made these churches more entrepreneurial and responsive to change. But > the absence of a tax for the state denomination was a very real fear at the > time, even to guys like Patrick Henry. > Does conscience only matter when it comes to religion, or should freedom of > conscience extend to all peaceful life choices? Is there some part of > Jefferson's vision that we've yet to fulfill?Are we as barbarous as our > ancestors?Meet Ray. We'll call Ray a conscientious objector, because he acts > out of conscience. People confine this term to those who object to military > service. But why do those persons object? It’s a question of conscience. > Therefore, a conscientious objector is, quite literally, someone who obeys > their conscience rather than State edicts.Today's conscientious objector is > yesterday's dissenter.A conscientious objector is someone who wants the right > to divorce a service provider or institution. He is disgusted by what is done > in his name under the rubric of democracy, appalled at what is done with the > money extracted from him in taxes. He wants to terminate his support. > You may think Ray is noble until I tell you to what he objected: State > schooling, otherwise known as "public schools." > Ray loathed The State schooling service. Ray's specific objections aren't > relevant. The subject we must keep in sight is...Ray's conscience.The only > humane way to address the conscience of another is persuasion.Feel free to > talk someone out of their position. Ray would've welcomed such a > conversation. He could've given you his side of the story. > Ray's objection was deeply rooted, so he did something extraordinary. On the > basis that state schools violated his beliefs, he stopped paying property > taxes. Ray even wrote a Dear John letter to the school board. > A Dear John letter terminates a relationship. It's a divorce, a secession, a > break-up. Ray explained his desire to split from this scheme and live in > peace. > Remember, from theprevious installmentthatThe State is a bully. Ray began > receiving ominous letters about his bill. He responded with more Dear John > letters sharing his concerns. But it didn't matter. Eventually, he was, at > great personal expense, hauled into court. > At this point, Ray made a very American claim. He quoted Jefferson that it > was immoral to compel a man to furnish the funds for that which he abhors. > But the judge came down hard becauseThe State is a cartel. The judge accused > Ray ofinstigatingtrouble. It was Ray's fault, he claimed, that courts were > now involved. He claimed "shock" at Ray’s "unrepentant callousness." He piled > additional fines on top of Ray's bloated tax bill. > Ray was in turmoil. He was trying to do the right thing -- to obey his > conscience. > A principle is a principle. So Ray didn't turn over his money. I think you > know what happened next, for (as we covered in the previous installment) The > State is abusive. Armed men and women showed up to repossess Ray's house. > Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Watch them unravel...Pursuit of > happinessmeans the ability to pursue your dreams, including home ownership. > Armed men and women came to steal that. > Ray told them he wouldn't budge. They threatened to take his liberty, to > arrest him. > Ray pulled out a 20 gauge shotgun. It was more symbolic than deterring -- > hardly enough to win a confrontation. He waited. When the armed men and women > kicked down his door, they saw Ray with the shotgun, and they killed him. > Theystole his lifeall so that their bosses could teach boys to read, or > failing that, at least how to put on a condom. > Ray was a"captive customer." The cartel (the monopoly we described in the > previous installment) said so. Ray never harmed anyone. Yet the judge blamed > him, and he was murdered. > Keep in mind. You too, almost certainly, object to something The State does > in your name. You resent having to pay for it.Should YOU -- should any of us > -- be coerced, by bribe or by threats, backed by actual violence to fund a > service we loathe, particularly if that service violates your > conscience?Should Ray have been treated like Tyndale? > Should each of us, Ray included, be relieved of the Bullying, the Abuse, and > the captive nature ofthe Cartel-- left to live by our own conscience? > Is The State more important than your religious beliefs? ...more binding than > your marriage? You can divorce both -- give either a Dear John letter, if you > please. But you cannot break up with The State. > Human progress lies in continuing to move in the direction of conscience > instead of coercion. We learned the lesson of Tyndale. Can we learn from > Ray?http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/you-should-be-able-to-dear-john-the-state -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
