No Authority
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
In response to Harold Kitson's "Gun Owner" letter: Mr. Kitson you sound like an angry person. Also, where did I say that a citizen should not have the right to bear arms? What I said was, "Republicans use the anger of strong groups such as the NRA and the religious right to fight their self-serving battles." If I understand this right, however, and if I do not, I apologize. It seems you are an angry citizen (with a gun) who believes it is your job to defend the Constitution of the United States.
Mr. Kitson, I value your opinions, as individuals we only become stronger with resistance. No doubt, a bird flying in airless space only falls to the ground. Sir, I am going to go off the beaten path for a moment and offer some food for thought. Even though, some might find it hard to digest. It is in good will.
To start with, the Constitution of the United States was a contract between people over two centuries deceased, consequently, a contract between people existing at that time. The language neither expresses nor implies that they had any right or power to bind their posterity to live under it. Lysander Spooner, one of the most provocative and prolific American legal theorists of the 19th century, states in his work entitled "No Treason" that our forefathers had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. Just think, citizen, maybe you are defending a Constitution of no authority. There seems to be nothing in the Constitution that professes or even attempts to bind the posterity to those who established it.
Nevertheless, the concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a very noble venture. The Constitution was formed on this ideology. Basically, the people at the time wanted to protect their lives, their liberty, and their property from the encroachment of others. No doubt, the most fundamental function of government was to protect the "natural rights" of individuals to their person and property from others aggression. This view, also reflected in the unalienable rights sections of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, is the basis for the protective function of our government.
Mr. Kitson, you said that you swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Would you protect my person and property from the aggression, manipulation and subjugation by others? Where is my Constitution? Is it a Constitution of no authority? I would like to have a government which serves and protects, not one which subjugates and incarcerates. I would like to have a Constitution with authority. Maybe we need to take a walk off the beaten path sometimes. Above all, get away from age old talking points and clichés. So we can distinguish the glitter from the gold.
Bennie Hively
Warsaw, via e-mail[[In-content Ad]]
Latest News
E-Editions
In response to Harold Kitson's "Gun Owner" letter: Mr. Kitson you sound like an angry person. Also, where did I say that a citizen should not have the right to bear arms? What I said was, "Republicans use the anger of strong groups such as the NRA and the religious right to fight their self-serving battles." If I understand this right, however, and if I do not, I apologize. It seems you are an angry citizen (with a gun) who believes it is your job to defend the Constitution of the United States.
Mr. Kitson, I value your opinions, as individuals we only become stronger with resistance. No doubt, a bird flying in airless space only falls to the ground. Sir, I am going to go off the beaten path for a moment and offer some food for thought. Even though, some might find it hard to digest. It is in good will.
To start with, the Constitution of the United States was a contract between people over two centuries deceased, consequently, a contract between people existing at that time. The language neither expresses nor implies that they had any right or power to bind their posterity to live under it. Lysander Spooner, one of the most provocative and prolific American legal theorists of the 19th century, states in his work entitled "No Treason" that our forefathers had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. Just think, citizen, maybe you are defending a Constitution of no authority. There seems to be nothing in the Constitution that professes or even attempts to bind the posterity to those who established it.
Nevertheless, the concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a very noble venture. The Constitution was formed on this ideology. Basically, the people at the time wanted to protect their lives, their liberty, and their property from the encroachment of others. No doubt, the most fundamental function of government was to protect the "natural rights" of individuals to their person and property from others aggression. This view, also reflected in the unalienable rights sections of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, is the basis for the protective function of our government.
Mr. Kitson, you said that you swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Would you protect my person and property from the aggression, manipulation and subjugation by others? Where is my Constitution? Is it a Constitution of no authority? I would like to have a government which serves and protects, not one which subjugates and incarcerates. I would like to have a Constitution with authority. Maybe we need to take a walk off the beaten path sometimes. Above all, get away from age old talking points and clichés. So we can distinguish the glitter from the gold.
Bennie Hively
Warsaw, via e-mail[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092