Do We Understand?

Bobblehead DollOne of my closely held beliefs is that we will be held accountable for the heritage left us by those who have fought and bled, and came before us.  When I see the farrago that has become Afghanistan, the ineptitude of Vietnamese legacy, the current condition of the White House, politics in America, and the politicians refusing their jobs. I am always left asking, “What will our forefathers say?”  With hundreds, possibly thousands of Americans abandoned in Afghanistan by the sitting US President, a complicit Congress, and the spineless Joint Chiefs of Staff, I cannot help but wonder what the President Generals of the United States will say to these people.

Before we hear from the US President’s, let us first clear our minds with the following from Mark Twain.

The statesmen will invent cheap lies, blaming the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself the war is just and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.”

The fraudulent president, Joey, and his Joint Chiefs are in this position right now.  They are deceived, they deceived themselves, and if America is not careful, their self-deception will mean enemies on Main Street.  No hyperbole, no scaremongering, no warmongering; simply truth simply stated.  Joey and his Joint Chiefs are blaming America for being in Afghanistan for too long, and the chaos in leaving is America’s fault.  Their self-deception should not be our problem, our lie, or our “conscience-soothing falsity.”Angry Grizzly Bear

President (Colonel) Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt has the next word, and he declares and details our problem precisely:

Political parties exist to secure responsible government and to execute the will of the people.  From these great tasks, both of the old parties have turned aside.  Instead of instruments to promote the general welfare, they have become the tools of corrupt interests which use them impartially to serve their selfish purposes.  Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government, owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.  To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day” [emphasis mine].

Do we understand the problem?  Are we clear about the issues facing our nation?  Is the mission clear?  The current crop of politicians have purposefully turned from their roles, like dogs to their vomit, and refused the people who elected them for personal power and individual success.  Well, what do you do when you catch your dog rolling in its vomit?  What do you do when you find a toddler crayoning the walls after telling them no?  Will the adults in the room, please stand? You are needed!photo_slideshow_max

President (Lieutenant) John F. Kennedy provides a caution pertinent to this discussion, and a word of timely caution is worth gold and silver to those who heed and follow its counsel:

The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in ensuring our nation’s survival if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is a very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. …
For we are opposed worldwide by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, subversion instead of elections, intimidation instead of free choice, and on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system that has conscripted vast human and material resources into building a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations.  Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed” [emphasis mine].

There are lots of questions about who has been pulling Joey’s strings.  Who is president right now, as senile Joe is not in charge, Kamala is not in attendance, and Pelosi is silent and retiring shortly.  The Afghanistan farrago is humiliating, devastating, and despicable; yet, none of the politicians are willing to be publicly outspoken, convening investigations and using their powers to lead and rescue Americans.  Why?  Congress has the War Powers Act; they can act independently of the US President and demand that the US Military enter Afghanistan, rescue US Passport holders, and destroy American hardware, munitions, and other war materials.  Congress could depose the US President legally, through impeachment proceedings, and install a new president.  Yet, nothing is happening.  Why?Plato 2

President (General) George Washington provides guidance, counsel, and direction worthy of consideration in the following panacea of quotes:

    • “The power under the Constitution will always be in the people. It is entrusted for certain defined purposes, and for a certain limited period, to representatives of their own choosing; and whenever it is executed contrary to their interest, or not agreeable to their wishes, their servants can, and undoubtedly will, be recalled.” … “Be Americans. Let there be no sectionalism, no North, South, East, or West. You are all dependent on one another and should be one in union. In one word, be a nation. Be Americans, and be true to yourselves.”
    • “Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society.” … “It is impossible to govern the world without God. It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the Providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits and humbly implore his protection and favor.”

Herein is a call to action, from a general mustering both his troops and citizenry, calling all able-bodied people to learn two great truths.  First, we are the owners of government and hold the reigns of power.  Second, we cannot make the changes needed without the help of almighty God,  regardless of the name we call Him.  For too long, we have been divided on the first and not allowed to perform the second, and it is time to end the power that divides and separates.The Duty of Americans

While not a military president, his cunning mind is a powerhouse of wisdom that provides essential ideas and insight, and I am pleased to quote President John Adams.  Again we find a panacea of quotes:

    • Every problem is an opportunity in disguise.” … It should be your care, therefore, and mine, to elevate the minds of our children and exalt their courage; to accelerate and animate their industry and activity; to excite in them a habitual contempt of meanness, abhorrence of injustice and inhumanity, and an ambition to excel in every capacity, faculty, and virtue. If we suffer their minds to grovel and creep in infancy, they will grovel all their lives.”
    • Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”

Are we allowing the suicide of the American Republic through the groveling in the infancy of our children’s minds?  Look at K-12 education and how ideas from the late 1800s and early 1900s continue to shape your child’s classroom experiences — producing functionally illiterate products at state-run schools, abusing your child of their God-given potential, and robbing them of a lifetime of learning through labels, invented science, and drugging them into submission.Angry Wet Chicken

Yet, President Adams is correct; the problem of K-12 education is an opportunity in disguise.  The opportunity to learn is an individual one; it is an opportunity for the community to step in and demand the politicians go away; it is an opportunity for citizens to awake and arise and refuse the cruel gruel of oppression and require the fruit of liberty be fed to their children.

There are two pieces of wisdom passed to us from President Thomas Jefferson also apt for this discussion:

    • Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty.”
    • If you want something you’ve never had, you must be willing to do something you’ve never done.”

Knowledge Check!With these thoughts, we come to the brief conclusion of this article, but not the conclusion of the need for learning, teaching, and action.  The destruction of America has progressed sufficiently that none of us now living have experienced the tempestuous sea of liberty due to the calm lakes of despotism that has overtaken our land.  Desire something you have never had, real liberty, and let’s be willing to do everything we need to possess this gift for ourselves and pass something better to our children!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

SCOTUS – The Abortion Decision: Awake Society!

Exclamation MarkI have written about abortion previously.  I have discussed the problems with legislating from the bench and the societal issues when judges take powers unto themselves.  Today, the media is in shock and awe over the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) making an abortion decision not to strike down a law in Texas.  Would it shock and dismay anyone if I explained that SCOTUS still got the decision wrong?  From the pen of Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, we find why the current SCOTUS got the latest decision wrong.

The law is the witness and external deposit of our moral life. Its history is the history of the moral development of the race.” ~ Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

The ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas [and] the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” ~ Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

The history of abortion on demand is fraught with legislative attempts that were superseded by judicial activism.  By judges acting to legislate from the bench and cram new moral authority into American law, without the consent of the governed, problems in governance arose.  The most egregious problem is the dependence upon judges to solve legitimate legislative issues, and therein lay both the destruction and the solution to the current dilemmas of American society.

What are moral issues?

A person smoking is a moral issue, not a legal issue.  Abortion is a moral issue, not a legal issue.  Moral issues deal solely with how a person chooses to live their lives, regardless of how another person thinks they should live their lives.  Drunk driving is a legal issue as it places other members of society in danger when an intoxicated person operates a vehicle impaired.  But, drinking is a moral issue, provided that person is of social/legal age to drink.  Is the distinction clear?  Provided the exercise of a person’s moral choices does not interfere with another person’s ability to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.  The moral decisions of the first individual do not become legal issues of the second person.The Duty of Americans

The feminists of the day wanted to control women’s bodies and control how often men had sex with women.  This was part of a larger social trend to see women gain more rights and privileges in society, a moral issue.  The feminists used friendly judges to chip away at the social fabric until they obtained a legal decision that allowed for abortion on demand.  Fundamentally, the decisions of the feminists to exert control of mass populations of females was a violation of those females’ moral agency as many of them did not join the feminists’ associations before becoming influenced by the consequences of the decisions made in the name of females everywhere.

Social Change Needed

The separation of moral agency and legal rights is thin but distinct; unfortunately, the line has become blurred through social influencing, social media, and judicial activism.  Society has fallen into helicopter parenting, and the courtroom has become both the parent and the potential gold mine.  Find the right case, find a friendly judge, and take the current case to the media to inflame a population and try the case socially before the case is conducted legally.  The other side barely stands a chance anymore.  Even if you lose the case in court, you win socially, which changes minds and hearts, leading to more changes to laws, just a smaller payday.Gavel

As a kid, if you took a decision to a parent and the first one told you no.  Then you went to another parent for a second opinion; how much trouble were you in?  In my family, you got punished by both parents, twice the beating for the same decision.  My buddy, his parents were getting a divorce; he used this tactic to the fullest all the time as a weapon against his parents, as his parents used him (only child) as a weapon against each other.  Only later did I fully appreciate the horror and tragedy my buddy was in during this time in his life.  Worse, it has only been in the last couple of decades that I have realized how terrible this lesson has been for all of American society and what it has done to our courts and legal system.

The Opportunity

Freedom means being responsible for our own actions and their consequences.  Our moral agency allows us the power to act and puts us in the driver’s seat to control our choices in our lives.  But, we do not get to pick the consequences, when the consequences land, or the severity of the consequences.  We can only control what we do with our choices.  I prefer to have unfettered freedom than nanny-state control.  Who controls the government in a nanny-state?  Honestly, look to Cuba, China, Venezuela, the USSR, and ask who controls the nanny-state, as they strive to control every aspect of you?Behavior-Change

In representative governments, we, the people, are responsible and control the government.  We cannot abdicate this responsibility, and the government cannot seize power without our consent.  Herein lays our golden ticket to the chocolate factory; their bounds are set, ours are not!  The government can only go as far as we declare they can.  After leaving American citizens to the ravages of the Taliban in Afghanistan, polluting our shores with an unsecured southern border, and all the other crises we are dealing with, it is time we started restricting the government of consent.

SCOTUS’ decision was still wrong because they should never have issued a decision in the first place.  The decision SCOTUS should have given should have been a single sentence, “Abortion is a moral issue, not a legal issue, and we are removing the courts from this issue and returning it to the legislative bodies of the United States for further decisioning.”  With that single sentence, all legal proceedings, legal determinations, and laws on abortion would have been halted, awaiting a legislative determination.  Then, and only then, would a great injustice have been legally righted in America and the 50 individual states’ legislative bodies being empowered to choose as their citizens saw fit.

Knowledge Check!SCOTUS could then do the same for same-sex marriage and every other moral issue they have legislated from the bench over the last 200 years.  This leads to a dramatic change in and correction of the judicial branch and honoring the legislative and executive branches of government.  When judicial activism ends, people understand that liberty is more precious than gold and silver and then live their lives according to the dictates of their own consciousness, leaving others to do likewise.  Our opportunity is to return to this manner of legal system, seize this golden ticket and return to sanity in freedom!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

The Law and Ideas

Bird of PreySeveral days back, I came across some incredible quotes from Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. that started me thinking on several topics.  I beg your attention as we discuss the fundamental truths of the following two quotes:

The law is the witness and external deposit of our moral life. Its history is the history of the moral development of the race.” ~ Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

The ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas [and] the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” ~ Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

QuestionI am not here to debate the law.  However, in discussing these two quotes, predominantly since they originate from a Supreme Court Justice of the United States of America, we will discuss aspects of the law.  The same goes for religion and philosophy; it is necessary to discuss aspects of both religion and philosophy to discuss the law.  However, I am not here to debate either religion or philosophy.

The Law and Social Morals

2015, in a decision that shocked the American Nation, the Supreme Court decided Obergefell v. Hodges and same-sex marriage stopped being a state right’s issue and became a Federal issue, even though the Federal Government does not issue marriage licenses.  Using the two quotes above, we find the truth of both in the actions of the court.  The court decided that the Federal Government needed to “step into” a state’s right issue to prevent a kaleidoscope of legal decisions across the entire 50- and American Territories.Plato 2

What is wrong with 50-different states exerting their rights?  The SCOTUS decision states the following, “equal dignity in the eyes of the law.”  Apparently, SCOTUS forgot to read and understand decisions from previous justices who faced a similar moral issue.

I have no respect for the passion of equality, which seems to me merely idealizing envy – I don’t disparage envy, but I don’t accept it as legitimately my master.” ~ Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Same-sex marriage was all about envy, not rights, not liberties, not freedoms, envy!  Envy couched in the language of “equality.”  Love, devotion, sacrifice, family, all of it was smoke-screens and mirrors to hide envy.  Those who engage in bedroom practices that were not in the mainstream wanted their relationship to be a “marriage.”  With all the state and civil granted benefits involved.  The simple solution to this moral dilemma was to remove the government’s self-appointed authority to regulate marriage.  The day the state and local governments decided to regulate marriage was when citizens lost fundamental rights to keep the government out of their business.  One of the most significant privacy abuses in the world occurs every time the government forces a couple to register (license) a marriage.

ApathyWorse, the government forces you to pay a tax to get married.  By paying a licensing fee, the government taxes marriages, invades your privacy, and in doing so, provides you the ability to pay for the privilege of inviting the government into your bedroom.  The moral development of the law to govern society hinges upon justices not legislating from the bench, judges who refuse judicial activism because the elected representatives of the government are moving too slow on an issue, and judges who remain dedicated to the limits of the law.  Yet, the exact opposite has been allowed to occur by the elected representatives who abdicate their roles to the judicial branch, who refuse their duties as a co-equal branch of the government, and people who use the law for selfish ends and means.

Question 2What is more precious to you, government benefits, granted by the courts and purchased from taxpayers in another area, or privacy, freedom, and liberty?  How you answer this question should be revealing to you and a reminder of your obligations as a legal citizen of these United States of America, a free Republic (if we can keep it).  Freedom has a cost; the cost involves being involved in elections, voting smarter, watching and scrutinizing those elected, and monitoring the actions of judges and lawyers.

Privacy and Freedom – The Law and Ideas

From the US Bill of Rights and US Constitution as amended, we find that America’s founding fathers wanted an individual’s privacy held sacrosanct in American Law.  Unfortunately, what do we see in the laws of America the exact opposite?

        • Amendment I
          (Privacy of Beliefs)
          Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances.
        • Amendment III
          (Privacy of the Home)
          No Soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
        • Amendment IV
          (Privacy of the Person and Possessions)
          The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
        • Amendment IX
          (More General Protection for Privacy?)
          The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
        • Liberty Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
          No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Knowledge Check!One might ask, where is the marketplace for ideas.  The answer begins inside the walls of your own home.  Except, if you enter your thoughts on social media, the Department of Internal Revenue Service has empowered your employer to withhold employment to express your thoughts inside your own home or on your social media accounts.  Worse, the government calls this a privilege of employment and a cost of doing business in a technological age.  Hence the first two places where ideas are testing truth, and competing for market share, are social media and your home.

Where else would one expect to have the freedom to share ideas?  Employment and religion are two other places where the government regulates and restricts ideas.  How many churches faced IRS sanctions for allowing political speech inside their walls, every single one!  What about employers; they limit the sharing of ideas on a host of topics under the language of diversity, inclusion, and risk.  Due to fear from the potential of people to become violent, the insurance companies and IRS allow your liberties, privacy, and constitutional rights to be curtailed, culled, and clipped as an excuse to protect your safety at work.

As a final thought, consider the following:

For my part, I think it is a less evil that some criminals should escape than that the government should play an ignoble part.” ~ Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.Never Give Up!

Playing an ignoble part in the confiscation, curtail, and culling of rights, liberties, and freedoms, has been the improper role of government since President Wilson (D).  He was allowed to do what he did by a complicit Congress and the K-12 educations of the populace.  The reason functional illiteracy is so rampant, the government in the 1860s approved Dewey’s ideas to make students dumber, purposefully, to ensure the government could steal power unconstitutionally.  By the end of the 1940s, the coup was complete, and you became the property of government to be used and abused as the government desired.  Some Sunday thoughts to begin your next week with; unfortunately, the ideas must lead to action if America is to be saved!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

The Proper and Improper Role of Government – Part 2

QuestionThe following is the second part of the series on the proper and improper role of government. First, imperative to the discussion is a quick recap on the purpose of a government, and then we will discuss the actual role of government.  Second, the following cannot be stressed enough, America was founded upon a Judeo-Christian understanding and philosophy.  Other representative governments have removed the influence of religion globally, but America, thankfully, continues to keep it around.  Third, nothing herein is to be misconstrued as supporting any single religion, including atheism and agnostics.  My religious beliefs are not your business, just as your religious beliefs are not my business; we are not here to debate theology, philosophy, or anything but the government’s proper and improper role.

What is the purpose of government?

The second sentence of The Declaration of Independence is long but powerful:

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.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

The purpose of government is to “secure these rights… deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”  The rights the government is to secure are “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  When talking about securing, we are not inferring that those rights come from the government, are tools of government, or can be dispersed by the government.  When discussing securing, we are talking about the government protecting against threats to, harm from, or the need to make safe from those who would do the collective body of citizens harm.  The government securing rights does not mean affixing those rights to an individual, as the individual already owns these rights.  The government’s purpose is to protect the body of citizens by making the body of citizens safe.quote-mans-inhumanity

The etymology of secure is vital to understanding the purpose and proper role of government. “Mid 16th century (in a sense ‘feeling no apprehension’): from Latin Securus, from Ee- ‘without’ + Cura ‘care.’”  Hence, without care for an individual, the government secures, protects, and defends the individual’s inalienable rights.  Not deciding what is good for the masses, not selecting winners and losers based upon the whims and wishes of a bureaucrat, but considering the entire mass of citizens without preference and defending their inalienable rights is the purpose of government.

What is the proper role of government?

Government LargessFrom many Judaic and Christian sources, one can find various systems of government in place throughout history.  From despots of the most vile to the judges of Israel, which brought liberty and freedom instead of kings, one can find just about any form of government represented in historical texts of ancient date.  More specifically, one can find the proper role of government, which is stated most simply in the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C) of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints, specifically Section 134:2.

We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.”

Is the proper role of government clearer? For example, suppose the government is only focused upon securing the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of [private] property, and the protection of life. In that case, that government is fulfilling its proper role.  Did you notice what is missing from the strict interpretation of the proper role of government?  Social services, arbitration, buying support through forced taxation, and much more.  Except, America was established as a Constitutional Republic with democratically elected representatives.  Thus, does America’s government have a different interpretation of the proper role of government?

Ziggy - IRS AuditThe founding fathers, and several of the first presidents in America, were considered statesmen. However, statesmen are not merely politicians, and politicians are never statesmen!  A statesman is a person who is well versed in the principles or art of government, actively engaged in conducting the business of government or in shaping its policies.  The statesmen are respected for their skill, diplomacy, power to communicate ideas, and being principled.  Thus, the statesmen are morally upright and can be trusted to understand why they are morally principled and why the law should be morally centered.  It cannot be stressed enough. The true statesmen values principles over popularity and works to create popularity for political principles in government operations that are morally sound and bring the most freedom to the most people.

Consider the following from Albert E. Bowen:

Right and wrong as moral principles do not change.  They are applicable and reliable determinants whether the situations with which we deal are simple or complex.  There is always a right and wrong to every question which requires a solution.”

The Duty of AmericansNow, returning to the proper role of government, any form of government instituted by man, we find the following as guidance in measuring said governmental role.  From D&C 134;1-2, 5:

1 We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society.

2 We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.

5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.”

From the US Constitution’s Preamble, a person will find why the government was instituted.  “… in order to form a more perfect Union (government), establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”  Between the Articles of Confederation, the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the offered verses, we find similar language discussing the purpose and role of government.

Thus, the proper role of government remains simple and easy to understand.  The proper role of government is to secure man’s inalienable rights, protect private property, and ensure each citizen may pursue their path of happiness.  A citizen’s path of happiness cannot infringe upon another citizen’s pursuit of happiness, steal their property, damage their property, or destroy public property.  Hence, the government must balance the inalienable rights of a person to commit crimes against the acceptable restriction to hold people accountable to socially acceptable laws while never infringing upon an individual’s conscience.  Therein lay the seeds of the improper role of government.Apathy

What is the improper role of government?

Ziggy - NSAThe improper role of government begins with refusing to accept that government power is limited to only those powers the citizens grant the government.  Thankfully, there is a simple test for understanding what powers the government has or does not have.  The test: Can you order your neighbor to pay for welfare for another person?  If not, the government does not have this right or power.  Can your neighbor call you to pay subsidies to them for keeping their lawn and home maintained?  If not, the government does not have the right to spend taxpayer money to subsidize another person’s housing.  This simple test relates the power of government, the government’s improper role, and reasonable government restrictions.

The line between the proper and improper role of government is thin but very distinguishable using the simple test described above.  Claude-Frédéric Bastiat was a French economist, writer, and prominent member of the French Liberal School. A member of the French National Assembly, Bastiat developed the economic concept of opportunity cost and introduced the parable of the broken window.  We present Bastiat as providing the logic behind the simple test.  “Nothing can enter the public treasury for the benefit of one citizen or one class unless other citizens and other classes have been forced to send it in.”  Hence, the simple test regarding a neighbor forcing you or forcing your neighbor is justified as the test for the proper or improper role of government.Patriotism

Forced taxation is a form of legal plunder, and since payment is the test for which powers are proper or improper for government, we must return to Bastiat for a delineation of legal plunder.

When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it – without his consent and without [just] compensation, whether by force or by fraud – to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property was violated; that an act of plunder is committed. … How is legal plunder to be identified?  Quite simply.  See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong.  See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.”

Government Largess 3Legal plunder is theft through the misuse of the power of government.  Consider the following example, your paycheck.  On that paycheck, the Federal and State governments demand money from you, not earned but forced through jurisprudence and legislative fiat, and those funds are given to another person.  As a private citizen, if I took your wallet and removed money from it, I would be guilty of theft and liable to the penalties of criminal and civil law, even if I did not keep your cash but donated it to a charitable organization.  Remember, the simple test that details the difference between the proper and improper role of government.

One additional piece of knowledge where the improper role of government is described and dictates that government cannot create wealth.  No government, at any time throughout history, has produced wealth.  The government takes from the citizens to survive, and the proper role of government would see every cent of forced taxation as a precious resource, needing to be accounted to the citizens forced to pay.  People create wealth, and if you desire a full explanation of how money is created, please see the following link.

Plato 2Why does it matter?

The government cannot exist without the consent of the governed.  Your inalienable rights should be the only concern of any government form, type, or methodology.  Yet, what do we find; legal plunder to buy other citizens’ support.  We find legalized plunder without transparency, without accountability, and without regard for those struggling to pay the forced taxation (legalized plunder).  We find Trillions in missing money in every government, where the representatives are not concerned, or even aware, of the money lost.  We see government spending above and beyond its intake, creating debt penalties for many future generations to pay for the benefits of the current generation, all because the government refuses to live on a budget.  We find bureaucrats treating citizens as property and abusing that property worse than any corporate polluter of the 1970s.

Knowledge Check!Look carefully, dear citizen; government only exists by the will of the governed.  Do you think it is time for a change in government?  Do you feel your government is fulfilling its purpose and proper role or is your government abusing its rights and powers as granted through the consent of the governed?  You must answer these questions and then decide where you stand.

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

The Proper and Improper Role of Government – Part 1

Several years ago, I tripped across a paperback book and felt to read the book.  It was written by Ezra Taft Benson, who was the 15th US Secretary of Agriculture, whom I respected for his keen mind; I felt compelled to read his book.  Mr. Benson, writing about the proper role of government, providing a running commentary about the founding of the United States of America, is worthy of study by every student as a part of social studies.  Before reading this book, I had not thought about the role of government, proper or improper. However, after reading this book, I came to understand why America is in such trouble and how the government is the perpetrator of the crimes against the citizen of America.

If they were missed, I have written articles about the US Constitution, the US Bill of Rights, the role of the “Rule of Law,” and other founding documents.  All these and more are essential or fundamental principles of understanding for discussing the government’s proper and improper role.  Please note, when talking about the proper and improper role of the government, I am not explicitly discussing The United States of America; but all non-Communist governments and many of the principles should be applied to communist governments to improve the situation for the citizens.

Private Property Produces Liberty and Freedom

Unfortunately, to fully appreciate all Mr. Benson is discussing, one must first understand the role of private property.  Charles Reich, an American legal and social scholar and an author while also a Professor at Yale Law School, wrote a paper every American citizen needs to read and be concerned over.  With the US Government changing the definition of private property and selecting winners and losers for government investment, the US Government radically changed and fundamentally destroyed the basic fabric of American law!  “Property is not a natural right but a deliberate construction by society. Like the Bill of Rights, property represents general, long-range protection of individual and private interests, created by the majority for the ultimate good of all” (Reich, 1964, p. 771-772)

Starting in the 1930s, during the “Great Depression,” changes were made to America’s methods of governance by the President, a willing media, including sycophants in the Senate and House, continuing a trend that began under President Woodrow Wilson (D).  Thus, establishing the Federal and State Government’s ability to rule by largess, picking winners and losers based upon obeisance to a bureaucrat’s whims, wishes, and will.  Reich lays out this history, walks the reader through the laws, and makes the case that because of democratic rule, America’s Republic has been reduced to a feudal system where the government decides who gets the largess and who does not.  With the Federal and State Governments making these decisions, businesses do not compete fairly upon their own merits but upon how much taxpayer money they can bamboozle from Uncle Sam.  Unfortunately, the entire system hinges upon reducing private property ownership and the freedoms private property allows feeding the ever-hungry beast of Government consumption.

The United States of America and every representative government can only provide freedom to their citizens if that country allows ownership of private property.  From private property principles comes every freedom and liberty enjoyed, as even the government must bow to the will of the people owning private property. So how did the government hijack your personal liberties and freedoms; well, there are a couple of wrongheaded Supreme Court cases, several Federal Court Cases, a complicit Congress with supermajorities, and a couple of presidents who were forward-looking and planning on stealing for personal gain.  The judicial interpretations opened judicial activism, released judicial restraint, and Congress stepped into the vacuum to protect itself from the people’s will.

One of the scariest ways personal freedoms have been stolen has been through owning a home but not owning the property under that home.  Homeowner’s Associations and the United Nations Agenda 21 actions have stripped personal property and made the homeowner pay ever-increasing homeowners association fees for the privilege of losing liberty and freedom.  All these actions, and many more, originated in the government actions under President Woodrow Wilson and were compounded by President Franklin D. Roosevelt.  Many will try and claim WWI and the Great Depression, and WWII triggered taking “bold action” through the legislative process.  What they mean was the Legislative Branch kowtowed to the Executive Branch, while the Judicial Branch twiddled their collective thumbs and began to legislate from the bench.  Never forget, the two presidents with the most executive orders are Wilson and Roosevelt, and this was even with a complicit media and friendly legislative branch.

Reich (1964, p. 773) implicitly details that the power to change the culture and definitions of private property and liberty started with judicial activism that led to government intrusion.  “During the first half of the twentieth century, the reformers enacted into law their conviction that private power was a chief enemy of society and individual liberty. Property was subjected to “reasonable [emphasis in original] limitations in the interests of society. The regulatory agencies, federal and state, were born of the reform. In sustaining these major inroads on private property, the Supreme Court rejected the older idea that property and liberty were one and wrote a series of classic opinions upholding the power of the people to regulate and limit private rights.”  Continuing, Reich (1964) detailed relevance and the conflict of having government contractors and bureaucrats inventing the rules to provide services or grant largess.  Concluding that “many agencies take action which is penal in all but name,” and how these penal actions are punishing the citizen through adjudication without a judge, jury, or trial.

To review, the US Government stole private property, abused the US Constitution and US Bill of Rights, and fundamentally changed America.  Private property is the source of freedom and liberty in a representative government.  By choosing to limit private property, many have never been able to possess the most basic of human rights and liberties.  Worse, the deck has been stacked to keep the average citizen from owning private property.  When the US Government used statehood to strip constitutional authority from the states to own their own land, America started a decline where private property produced liberty and freedoms.  These are crucial steps in the journey to understanding the proper and delineating the improper role of government.

Finally, Reich brings us to the summum bonum of the problem where the government, Federal and State, have been leading the citizen, the “Welfare State” as a “Right.”  Consider, “It is time to recognize that “the public interest” [emphasis in original] is all too often a reassuring platitude that covers up sharp clashes of conflicting values and hides fundamental choices. It is time to see that the “privilege” or “gratuity” concept, as applied to wealth dispensed by government, is not much different from the absolute right of ownership that private capital once invoked to justify arbitrary power over employees and the public”  (Reich, 1964, p. 787).  Who is smart enough to “know” “the public interest?”  Honestly, which political party, politician, business leader, or influencer would you select, always to know the “public interest” and work for the “common good?”

Without private property, the citizen will not find a secure place to consider how to vote and who to vote for properly. This has been designed into government to facilitate single-party rule.  I agree with Reich (1964, p. 787), “Above all, the time has come for us to remember what the framers of the Constitution knew so well-that “a power over a man’s subsistence amounts to a power over his will.” We cannot safely entrust our livelihoods and our rights to the discretion of authorities, examiners, boards of control, character committees, regents, or license commissioners. We cannot permit any official or agency to pretend to sole knowledge of the public good.”  Hence, before we can understand the government’s proper and improper roles, we must have liberty derived from private property!

References

Benson, E. T. (1995). The proper role of government: The Improper Role of Government. H. V. Andersen (Ed.). Heber City, UT: Archive Publishers.

Charles A. Reich, The New Property, 73 Yale L.J. (1964). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylj/vol73/iss5/1

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: Intention and Discernment – Tools Worth Knowing

Foghorn Leghorn - MedicationParents, how many times have you witnessed a toddler going about their day, an idea crosses their face, and you can tell they are about to do something that gets that toddler in trouble?  I heard a comedian talk about witnessing this as the toddler saw the cat sleeping in the sun, the toddler crossed the room and kicked the cat.  When asked why the toddler claims “it was accident.”

What is intention?

Intention is all about deliberate action, using a plan, and involving ideas in action.  According to Webster, intention is also the healing process of a wound, but this definition is not part of our discussion.  From Latin, we find intentio as “stretching purpose” and originates with intendere meaning “towards, stretch, and tend.”

Calvin & Hobbes - Irony HurtsConsider these definitions for a moment and the story about the toddler kicking the cat.  We have a plan, a purpose, and a deliberate action.  How does the parent discern the act was deliberate; the use of observation as to what the toddler had done to the cat previously, what the toddler was doing immediately before they kicked the cat, and the attempt to use an excuse to get out of trouble.

Discerning Intention.

Never Give Up!When defining discernment, I am not entering holy waters to discuss the pieces of discernment that belong to discerning for religions.  Discernment is the ability to obtain sharp perceptions, observations that empower decision-making.  Discernment can be psychological, moral, or aesthetic.  Discernment is also defined through the contexts; scientific, normative, and formal. The process of discernment involves going past the mere perception of something and making nuanced understandings about its properties or qualities.

Note, there is also a legal definition, or standard, for discernment, “the cognitive condition of someone who understands; savvy, understanding, apprehension knowing about their actions before, after, and during the act;” which is where things get sticky when discernment and intention cross paths.  Hannity and Carlson disagree on the actions of the jury in the Derek Chauvin case.  Not being a lawyer and not knowing all the legal jargon, the best I can do is form an opinion.  I base my opinion on other high-profile cases where the media has condemned an individual as guilty before the judge and jury are formed.  Meaning, I feel the jury was intentionally and unfairly biased against Derek Chauvin due to the influence of the media and the mob outside the courtroom’s doors.Thin Blue Line

There was a shooting of a teenage girl in Columbus, Ohio, by a police officer.  The girl had a knife in hand, did not listen to the police officer responding, and lunged at another person before being shot.  Again, we come to discerning intention and split-second decision-making.  Only, in this instance, the officer has no history of the person holding a knife, only reports of a stabbing and an apparent altercation involving a knife when they arrive on the scene.  I offer no judgment in this case as this case continues to unfold, details are still being investigated, and family interviewed.  Yet, the media is already off and running their biased opinions, and mobs have formed for mobocratic justice, which is never just nor proper.

Calvin & Hobbes - Ontological QuandryUnfortunately, this pattern repeats too often, and thus the need to understand discernment and correctly discerning intention.  My intent is not to make you as adept at this practice as a police officer. In a Republic, and even in many democratic societies, the citizens need to discern and discern intention, two separate processes.  The media will sell a lurid and emotionally charged story with all the bias of a bull in a China Shop and never care about the consequences.  But, the citizen does not have the same luxury or legal protections as the media.  Hence, we must discern what the media relates and discern the media’s intention before we ever read or listen to their story/reporting of events.  Thus my intent in this article and bringing up this topic, we, the citizens, are held to a higher law than the media and cannot afford to form mobs, trust the media’s reporting, or even rely upon the press reported “facts” to discern and discern intent.

How do you make a decision requiring action?

GearsThe process for critical thinking, leading to intentional decision-making, with purposeful action, generally follows the following pattern:

      1. Gather data
        • Requires knowing the validity of the source data and trusting the sources.
      2. Organize the data
      3. Make preliminary decisions and determine an action to take.
      4. Beta test the decision through application to a minimal audience to refine the solution and ensure the integrity of the data.
      5. Roll out the entire decision, including the solution and the reasoning, take timely action.
      6. Monitor and make course corrections as needed.

Detective 4These steps are useless unless we understand our own intention before launching a decision-making process.  Consider, do you intentionally believe that others are doing their best or giving their best efforts?  Do you intentionally shut down your own opinion to consider the perceptions of others in making decisions?  Where in those steps do you stop and take a moment to ponder the short and long-term consequences of the solution devised?  When making decisions, do you ever consider the axiom, “If a solution is not Win/Win, everyone loses?”  Do we fear failing to make a correct decision if the future teaches us something new about the data changing the pattern of decision-making?  How do you learn?

Let us briefly examine that axiom, “If a solution is not Win/Win, everyone loses,” does not mean making everyone happy.  A good compromise leaves everyone upset and feeling cheated and settled on the issue under consideration.  Yet, the media and many politicians firmly believe that unless they win everything they desire in a solution, they have been robbed and feel justified in stirring up public angst and creating a worse problem.  The adults in society must understand both the good and the ill in creating Win/Win solutions, or all is lost, and the patients run the asylum.

Anton Ego 4In going back to the analogy of the toddler kicking the cat.  Does the solution in the short-term mean corrective behavior modification for a long-term lesson learned?  Does the better solution involve instruction as well as behavior modification?  Have we, the parents, discerned correctly the intention of the toddler sufficient to justify our decision?  Will the cat be safe around the toddler in the future because of the action we take at that moment?

How do you learn?

In answering this question, we must return to the topic of failure.  Do we consider failure a learning moment?   Do we appreciate the power of failing as integral to achieving success?  A close relative of mine in high school went out for the track team as a pole vaulter.  I looked into pole vaulting to learn more and was surprised at the ways, means, and multiple times the pole vaulter will fail.  The technical skills to pole vault are incredible, almost as unbelievable as being an operations manager in a manufacturing environment and being a parent.  Hence, the need for discernment and intention.

2012-08-13 07.37.28I close with a challenge, use discernment more intentionally in learning your way through failure to success.  Liberty and freedom allow us the power to fail our way to success, but only if we consciously choose to learn and discern better our steps in decision-making.  Know your intent, take a moment every day to consider your intent, and purposefully make decisions to live your intentions.  Trust yourself to discern.  Your confidence in discerning is key to understanding and using your intention to power decision-making as a process.  Please remember, what I am discussing requires time, you will fail, but you will also win and win BIG!  Enjoy the journey of discovery!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: Honest Questions

ApathyThe following are honest questions.  Please let me know your insights in the comments or IM me through LinkedIn if you know the answers.  I have many questions, but I can find no answer to, or reasoning for, in my research.

      1. What disqualifies a politician from becoming elected? The US currently has at least one governor, but more than likely five governors currently outside the law, the state supreme court has ruled, and the governor continues to act like a feudal lord on a power trip.  How many victims will come forward before their legislative branch forces out the governors being accused of sexual impropriety?
      2. How can a government agency win a retail customer service award when they have 45-90 minute wait times regularly in their lobby, spite-filled retail associates, and lazy workers? My local USPS has regularly won awards for “Best in Retail Service” awards from the USPS.  Today, I waited for more than an hour for packages that could not be retrieved on the day they were delivered, as the USPS requires 24-hours after delivery before the package is available for pickup.  I have some concerns!The Duty of Americans
      3. Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results. Frankly, I am madder than a wet chicken with a raging case of hemorrhoids over the continuing gun violence and social unrest in America and the World.  Why do we continue to punish legal-gun owners when criminals using weapons is the problem, and the solution is so profoundly simple, arm all law-abiding citizens!  Why do we keep repeating this same cycle?
      4. Why does the corporate media keep generating victims? Especially in America, generating victims should be frowned upon; yet, the media continues to make criminals victims and victims into mega-winners through the judicial process.  The taxpayer has to fund the payoffs.  Yes; I am talking about George Floyd and some others who the media created as victims and then blew up social unrest to feed their ego and make a story.Patriotism
      5. Why can’t the US Federal Government and other levels of Government be sued for infringement of rights? I have lost all rights and access to the Department of Veterans Affairs.  Because I cannot raise funds for a lawyer, I cannot bring a case to win my rights back, even though I have been injured three times and treated horribly, while the VAMC in Phoenix has broken Federal Law (HIPAA & EMTALA).  To even have my case evaluated, I have to raise $18,000.00, which is just the start of the legal fees, to potentially see if the VAMC in Phoenix has broken the law sufficiently for a Federal Prosecutor to decide I have a case.  While I resent the litigiousness in American Society, I also realize that the Government exceeds its legal bounds and needs to be forced into accountability.Guns and Liberals - A Pipe Dream

Those are my five top questions.  I do not want this post to appear maudlin, depressing, or negative; I do want this post, as with all my posts, to spark a conversation on change.  Americans, mainly but the trend is worldwide, have not asked their elected officials questions and demanded answers since the late 1940s.  The date coincides with the time when governments began changing the definition of property and claiming their citizens were the property of the Government.  That the intellectual property, farm/ranch/dairy goods were the Government’s property first, then the farmer/rancher/dairymen.  The growth of the Military-Industrial-Government complex is part and parcel of the problems we are facing today.3-direectional-balance

Consider the actions of the military junta in Myanmar and the continued violence in that country.  The Military-Industrial-Government complex got out of hand, and the citizens are trying to re-take their Government.  The death toll mounts because fundamental social problems are not being solved first to establish a stronger government, and the military will not cede power.  In a vacuum, those with the most weapons wins, and Myanmar is suffering from the vacuum.

Consider Cuba, Venezuela, Brazil, Greece, France, and so many other shaky governments.  You will find social problems stemming directly from the Military-Industrial-Government power trifecta stripping individual rights, committing atrocities, and all of this is a legacy of WWII.  Not the Cold War, not WWI, although some of the practices originate in WWI, the ideas did not become regular social answers until WWII and post-WWII recovery.

LinkedIn ImageLet us, the citizens begin to embrace and demand a “Liberty FIRST Culture” in our societies.  Where individual rights trump government action and bureaucratic fiat; and where the Government is physically reduced in size to allow Society to grow again.  Change must come through the appropriate use of the law, through the force of the collective will of the people willing to thwart Government and the Military-Industrial-Government trifecta!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: The Role of the Rule of Law

GavelRome made global history when it wrote down its laws and posted these laws in a manner that told everyone that the law was the highest order in the land, and everyone is held to the same legal standard.  Writing down laws was nothing new in societies; the Jews had written and codified their laws long before Rome, but to hold everyone accountable to the same legal standard set Rome apart and blessed their land.  Why did Rome eventually fall; they stopped holding everyone responsible to one rule of law.

What is the Role of Law?

Ask a lawyer this question, and you will get a similar answer to the following:

Laws provide a framework and rules to help resolve disputes between individuals. Laws create a system where individuals can bring their disputes before an impartial fact-finder, such as a judge or jury.”

Frankly, my experience with lawyers is as productive as my relationship with the VA, hostile and not productive.  Hence, I infer that the law’s role in society is to bring order to a social environment, produce equality under the law, and punish those who decide to break the law.  Law is an expectation, a social contract, that restricts and constricts behavior to a socially acceptable level.

Thin Blue LineConsider today’s tragic events in Boulder, Colorado.  Before the blood was even clean at the scene, we have the President and selected hysterical gun-grabbing politicians making hay and demanding “gun reform.”  Except, “Gun Reform” always means stealing guns from legal owners and doing nothing about illegal gun holders.  Nothing is being urged to avoid and eliminate criminal behaviors with a firearm.  The Rule of Law’s role only applies to those who choose to live according to society’s laws and rules.  Those choosing to live outside society’s rules are terrorists and need to be treated as such!

President Lincoln is quoted thus:

Let every American, every lover of Liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their abuse by others. As the Patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor; let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear [down] the character of his own, and his children’s Liberty. Let reverence for the [Constitutional] laws [of America]… become the political religion of the nation.” President Lincoln is quoted thus: “Let every American, every lover of Liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their abuse by others. As the Patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor; let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear [down] the character of his own, and his children’s Liberty. Let reverence for the [Constitutional] laws [of America]… become the political religion of the nation.”

President Lincoln continued to proclaim:

When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise, for the redress of which, no legal provisions have been made, I mean to say no such thing. But I do mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they continue in force, for the sake of example, they should be religiously observed.” The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume I, “Address Before the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois” (January 27, 1838), p. 112.

Does President Lincoln’s plea inspire you, encourage you, and provide direction for improving the government moving forward?  The role of the “Rule of Law” is to empower and motivate people, to create order in a society, and to constrict and restrict behaviors for those choosing to live outside societal norms and acceptable behaviors.  Is the role of the “Rule of Law” clear?

President AdamsWhat is the “Rule of Law?”

As President Lincoln was quoted above, the “Rule of Law” in America is:

“[The] support of the Declaration of Independence, the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor; let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear [down] the character of his own, and his children’s Liberty. Let reverence for the [Constitutional] laws [of America] … become the political religion of the nation.”

Are laws currently abusing America; absolutely!  Herein is the charge to action; the government has chosen to declare you are the US Government’s property (Reich, 1964).  Charles Reich’s discussion on “New Property” is unacceptable and unconstitutional in the extreme.  The lack of treating the western states in a constitutional manner is also unconstitutional.  The theft of farmer’s goods, fisherman’s wares, and ranchers’ products remain 100% unconstitutional.  Yet, the bureaucrats’ actions and the politicians continue to treat you and me as unwanted property in our own country.

ApathyLike Rome, the legislators and the President are not above the “Rule of Law.”  Even though these people continue to consider themselves above the “Rule of Law.”  Worse, no matter how many laws a country produces, if the society is immoral, the “Rule of Law” is a joke.  Consider the knife and machete attacks in the United Kingdom, outlaw guns, and people are still finding ways and means to hurt other people.  France has stringent laws, yet people rent vehicles and mow their neighbors down in case lots.  Japan, very orderly society; how do criminals make the news there; they use chemicals to poison their neighbors on a subway.  Laws do not dictate moral behavior, ever!

Laws can only, ever, restrict and constrain those amenable to living a moral life.  A “Liberty FIRST Culture” understands this principle and protects itself accordingly.  Bringing this topic to a subject closely related to the “Rule of Law,” morals, morality, and moral living are all products of people amenable to religious belief structures.  Those people who desire to maintain connections to a religious society act their ideology through living a moral life.

Life ValuedI am not saying everyone needs to change religions; I am claiming that religion plays a significant role in reducing people’s animal minds to become amenable to living in a social order that respects the law and being ruled by law to enjoy maximum freedom.  We also need to be clear, atheism is a religion per Webster, and while this is a topic for another article, religion is a codified belief system with adherents that form a social order based upon expectations of behavior.  Liberty and freedom require choices; choices require more than a single option or two for a person to make more; Liberty and freedom require written and codified moral statements that grow from living a moral lifestyle.

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: Affirmative Action – A Discussion

Non Sequitur - ClassicI wonder if maybe affirmative action is not just dead but ready for the waste pits of history.  I was refused a schedule at a McDonald’s in a small Utah town after being hired and trained.  Why; because a local workforce specialist pointed out to the franchise owner they had no mentally challenged people in their workforce.  Thus, in a time of depression, where college-degreed people competed for entry-level jobs, I and ten others were “bumped” from the schedule to accommodate affirmative action.

Cohen (1996) affirmed federal hiring has a set of laws, with exceptions for every rule, to justify not hiring individuals.  I have personally witnessed this in Albuquerque, NM, for the better part of three years.  All while there are specific laws in Albuquerque to hire veterans first.  Law does nothing but provide excuses for manipulators to excuse their behaviors.

Literary FiendAt the V.A. Hospital, the Forestry Service, Social Security Offices, and so many more local, state, and federal government offices, the hiring managers refuse to hire veterans.  Using every trick, legal loophole, and multiple other hiring paths to keep “undesired people” from being hired.  “Undesired people” includes people with handicaps.  Even though through Schedule A hiring, Federal Policy claims they have top priority in government hiring and veterans, spouses, and dependents with specific federal benefits, minorities (including men, people of color of all shades, American Indians, etc.).  All the best jobs, positions, and perks are awarded through nepotism and the court of public opinion.  The hiring system is structured in such a way as to remain in legal compliance to affirmative action while denying those for whom the law was supposed to help.  Thus, affirmative action is a shield protecting lousy behavior instead of as a tool to improve workforce hiring.

Detective 3Harasztosi and Lindner (2015) discussed how the minimum wages cost jobs and excluded the neediest citizens from employment.  I contend that affirmative action has negatively impacted minorities, men and women, disabled people, etc., most significantly using the principles and logic of Harasztosi and Lindner (2015).  Rules demanding social behavior always most significantly and negatively impact those designed in the law to enjoy the most benefit.  It seems to me the following from John Adams applies, the U.S. Constitution “… was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”  Hence, the path forward is not more laws to avoid, but less.  The way forward is the societal education in morals as governed through a religious society; atheism is a religious society, and the belief structure fits well in the path ahead.

Historically, there are no legal, moral, or ethical reasons for affirmative action.  Affirmative action, and the diversity policies feeding the modern workplace adopted after affirmative action, barely have a legal foothold, let alone a justifiable reason for existence (Brazelton, 2016; Oppenheimer, 2016; Pierce, 2013; Young, 2001).  Human Resources is the capitalization of human capital to meet organizational needs.  When the capitalization of human abilities is appropriately affected, the effort becomes work, leading to finished products or services for sale to consumers. When not adequately modified, the capitalization of human skills turns into waste, loss, confusion, and the organization will eventually “fall an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle” (Bloom, & Kamm, 2014; Typographical Journal, 1892).

Detective 4Sykes (1995) defined affirmative action as “… [T]he set of public policies and initiatives designed to help eliminate past and present discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” As promising as this sounds, affirmative action remains the biggest farce crammed down the business community’s throats since the Federal Income Tax. By focusing, as this definition states on “eliminating discrimination past and present,” the entire country forgets the wise words from Master Oogway in Kung Fu Panda, “Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, today is a gift; that is why it is called the present.” By focusing on the past, we project the same problems of the past into the future, ruining both the present and the future.

No, affirmative action is not necessary, needed, or applicable; affirmative action, and the diversity programs replacing affirmative action, were never required, useful, or valuable enough to create from whole-cloth the legal precedent to justify affirmative action (Brazelton, 2016; Oppenheimer, 2016; Pierce, 2013; Young, 2001). No, the short answer, no, remains clear, Affirmative Action was not needed in 1964 and is still not needed today.  In 1964 when the Civil Rights Legislation was passed, the educational and experience gap between those working and not working caused pay problems, yet new professional opportunities naturally occurred as educational opportunities increased.  No affirmative action was needed.

Calvin & Hobbes - Ontological QuandryNow that Affirmative Action has pampered more than two generations, we have more women and minorities in the workplace with the same skills as white males, and the same problem exists in deferential hiring, differential treatment based upon race, gender, and other politically acceptable groups.  People who want to work, start early, work hard, and prepare for better jobs through education, experience, and single-minded determinedness. Those who do not wish to work create excuses, live off the government dole, and remain entrenched in ignorance, causing poverty, loss of self-esteem, ruined families, and a host of social problems that those who are working have to deal with and pay taxes to the government who started the problem in the first place. All the while, these same workers have to fight affirmative action and diversity policies for new jobs, promotions, pay increases, etc., including all the issues associated with a minimum wage and associated costs (Harasztosi, & Lindner, 2015; Hawkins & Sowell, 2011).

VirtueThese are my thoughts, and I welcome your comments on this topic.  A “Liberty FIRST Culture” allows for disagreements in opinions as a means to improving a situation.  I have listed my sources for the views shared.  I have listed my experience with affirmative action.  Feel free to disagree and comment accordingly.

References

Bloom, R., & Kamm, J. (2014). Human resources: Assets that should be capitalized. Compensation & Benefits Review, 46(4), 219-222. doi:10.1177/0886368714555453

Brazelton, S. (2016). A hollow hope? Social change, the U.S. supreme court, and affirmative action. The Journal of Race & Policy, 12(2), 84-95. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/docview/1940981339?accountid=134061

Cohen, C. (1996). Should federal affirmative action policies be continued?. Congressional Digest, 75, 181-181.

Harasztosi, P. & Lindner, A. (2015). Who pays for the minimum wage? UC Berkeley.

Hawkins, J., & Sowell, T. (2011). Right-wing news: Interview with Thomas Sowell. Retrieved from http://www.rightwingnews.com/interviews/sowell.php

Master, Oogway (Character). (2008). Kung Fu Panda [DVD].

Oppenheimer, D. B. (2016). The disappearance of voluntary affirmative action from the U.S. workplace. The Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 24(1), 37-50. doi: http://dx.doi.org.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/10.1332/175982716X14538098991133

Pierce, J. L. (2013). White Racism, Social Class, and the Backlash Against Affirmative Action. Sociology Compass, 7(11), 914–926. https://doi-org.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/10.1111/soc4.12082

Sykes, M. (1995, August). The origins of affirmative action. Retrieved from http://www.now.org/nnt/08-95/affirmhs.html

Typographical Journal. (1892). Typographical Journal, Volume 4 [Google Play]. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=FydFAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA10-PA4&lpg=RA10-PA4&dq=%E2%80%9Cfall+an+unpitied+sacrifice+in+a+contemptible+struggle%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=DW3MDox1Xu&sig=vd-U9cqe7PVSqLbA27FIX5DgJOs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi4zp3I-ZTeAhXqwlQKHZfZC6QQ6AEwA3oECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9Cfall%20an%20unpitied%20sacrifice%20in%20a%20contemptible%20struggle%E2%80%9D&f=false

Young, I. M. (2001). Equality of Whom? Social Groups and Judgments of Injustice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 9(1). Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=4335602&site=ehost-live&scope=site

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: The Equality Act – More Questions

moral-valuesEpstein is dead, how remains a closely guarded secret; Weinstein is in prison; both are accused of sexual improprieties, one is convicted.  2017, or thereabouts, California passed legislation that is similar, almost plagiaristic, to the Equality Act recently passed in the US House of Representatives.  Who did the plagiarism is up for grabs and beyond the scope of the article?  However, questions need to be raised regarding the Equality Act’s language in California and DC.  Shortly after the California version of the Equality Act went into effect, pedophilia became a conservation topic.  Eventually, California decreased the penalties of pedophilia, all in the name of “Love.”

By passing SB-145. The bill’s revision would allow pedophiles not to be registered on the sex offender list as long as they are not 10 years older than the minor they were convicted of molesting.  The bill, introduced by Sen. Scott Weiner 18 months ago, relaxes sex offender registry requirements for sodomy and other acts with minors to reportedly end “discrimination against LGBTQ young people on the sex offender registry,” according to Weiner.”

ScalesThese are all facts; worse, these facts all point towards a severe problem, and one I would like to open a discussion about.  I repeat, only for emphasis, I am not judging.  I desire logical, non-emotionally charged discussion on a serious moral topic relevant because some people have refused to exercise control and have allowed their bedrooms into the public arena for inspection and discussion.  Again, I do not care about your preferences and choices, homo- heterosexual makes no difference.  Keep your private life private and the public square free of sexual actions, and I could care less what you do or choose to be; provided, your sexual preferences do not interfere with or harm anyone else’s rights, privacy, and liberties.

Explain Why!

Epstein and Weinstein are in trouble because of their sexual proclivities, one specifically for sex with underage women.  I want to know why Epstein is in trouble, but Kevin Jennings, President Obama’s Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug FreeSchools at the US Department of Education, who promoted NAMBLA (North-American Association for Man-Boy Love Association and the other members of NAMBLA are not in legal trouble?

Pedophilia!

LookThe following is an account of a person and family I am deeply aware of, not a story about me!  A man I know had a wife (20-years of marriage), two beautiful children, was an alcoholic, and from the time he was 12 until he was too old at 18, the local bar owner groomed him for a homosexual relationship as part of his job!  The job benefits included any drugs the boy desired, cigarettes, alcohol, the ability to drive the bar owner’s vehicles, but the work required a lot of overnight specials.  This man spent many years overcoming his demons and the alcoholism that ruined his first marriage, and the alcohol that almost killed him.  Unfortunately, the little town this man originates from had this problem for many years; the fact that young men were being hired and groomed for male-to-male sexual relations was an open secret in the town.  No help ever came to this man or any others before or after.

Of all the crimes that people perpetrate against children, pedophilia is an absolute abomination deserving of the harshest methods of mechanical castration the human mind can invent!  I stand by this claim and will not move because the LGBTQ+ crowd wants to call it “Love.”  Pedophilia is not about “Love;” it is Lust, Greed, and Sexual Desire perpetrated upon innocents and must cease!

GavelYet, the passing of the California Equality Act and the penal code changes where pedophiles are concerned was considered a natural evolution in correcting abuse of a targeted and misunderstood population.  How can pedophiles posing as homosexual predators of young children be considered a “misunderstood population?”  Sexual relationships between a man over the legal age of majority (18) and a child under the age of legal majority is a crime.  Why is the same standard not set and applied to those who groom young men or young women for homosexual intercourse treated equally?

Any teacher in a school Male/Female sleeps with underage students of the opposite sex is a crime.  Absolutely!  Not reporting these relationships to the proper authorities is a crime.  But, Kevin Jennings was told about a homosexual relationship between a student with concerns and a grown man, and not only was he not punished for not reporting this relationship, but he has also been heralded, shielded, and praised.  Homosexual relationships between grown men and young boys, grown women and young girls, are still pedophilia, and not criminalizing this population is a double-standard.  Why the disparate treatment under the law?

Are we aware of how big the problem is?

Detective 2Martin Luther King Jr. is quoted as saying, “Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.”  The LGBTQ+ communities have a group called Gay Lesbian Sex Education Network founded by Kevin Jennings.  My research makes me shudder to think about what is being taught in K-12 Education instead of Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic.  While a substitute teacher in an English class, the department head thought it completely acceptable to bring in literature that contained graphic and pornographic reading materials for sophomore, junior, and senior high school reading.  His excuse, “I just want to know the students are reading books.”  Seriously, real events, real people, and actual reasons, and I remain horrified at what was offered as literature for reading.  The books were provided to the school free of charge by GLSEN in partnership with NGOs on fighting illiteracy and national associations for reading.  It kind of makes you wonder where your tax dollars are going and why America’s students are functionally illiterate.

I am a strong advocate for improving literacy, empowering liberty and freedom through a more literate population, and growing a generation of children into responsible and knowledgeable adults.  Until that child reaches the legal age of majority (18), that child cannot, and should not, be exposed to materials that the parents find disturbing, immoral, and relationships that take advantage of their youth and naivety.  Yet, this is precisely what is occurring in public schools across America, and I remain highly concerned.

Detective 4In the Old Testament, Proverbs 22:6, “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it,” is a double-edged sword, akin to Damocles’ sword, and the consequences for training a child wrong means their life is ruined!  My friend, who was abused as part of his job, had his innocence and childhood stolen.  I talked to high school students who have been victims of predatory homosexuals; they are scared, they are being abused, but they feel stuck because of the double-standard in the law.  In my graduating class, a young woman and a young man had been molested in homosexual relationships; one tried committing suicide, the other fought depression and anxiety.  Neither one has been able to conquer these crimes from their childhood.

Worse, I have stories of predatory homosexual youths who prey on their classmates, and since the relationship is homosexual and between minors, there are no legal protections.  In one story, the nurse who was informed of the older classmate’s predatory nature offered tips on safer homosexual sex and sent the confused and hurt student back to class.  Who speaks to the depravity that has been injected into K-12 schools?  Who speaks for the victims who got into a sexual relationship and discovered they weren’t ready or did not want that type of relationship?  If the relationship was heterosexual, there are help groups, laws, and forces arrayed to help.  Why not for homosexual encounters?

kpiWhy was the Equality Act fast-tracked, and what will be the outcome where pedophiles and predatory humans are concerned?  The LGBTQ+ community is always talking about equality; where is equality for the victims from homosexual predators?  I want answers.  What I am witnessing is not my America, and I want to know why double-standards have been intentionally written into law to protect predators and not victims.

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.