tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28785049.post115417809563537581..comments2023-10-30T07:54:27.317-04:00Comments on Allegiance and Duty Betrayed:: An Inquiry into the Restraint of my Libertyjoaniehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11914891807184694081noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28785049.post-1154622743672952232006-08-03T12:32:00.000-04:002006-08-03T12:32:00.000-04:00I have only "one word" to say...the frog is almost...I have only "one word" to say...the frog is almost cooked.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28785049.post-1154480377459112682006-08-01T20:59:00.000-04:002006-08-01T20:59:00.000-04:00There's not a one of them in Washington that I'd g...There's not a one of them in Washington that I'd give a plug nickel for. Or in a lot of the state legislatures either.<BR/><BR/>Our founders must be rolling in their graves---and the hundreds of thousands who have died to defend the TYRANNY we now live under? What a waste of brave lives.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28785049.post-1154323150134140112006-07-31T01:19:00.000-04:002006-07-31T01:19:00.000-04:00Well reasoned and well said.Well reasoned and well said.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28785049.post-1154293281195771252006-07-30T17:01:00.000-04:002006-07-30T17:01:00.000-04:00In the nineteenth century, "the law" had a precise...<I>In the nineteenth century, "the law" had a precise meaning: A set of general rules of conduct toward others which applied equally to all and meant to prevent unjust conduct. The North Carolina Constitution is one set of such laws. Unfortunately, our legislators and bureaucrats no longer see themselves as constrained by the lawful limitations placed on them by the Constitution. In effect, they have become "lawless" because they now see "the law" as any rule or statute that they can get a majority to agree to, regardless of whether or not the power to pass that "law" was granted them by the Constitution.</I><BR/><BR/>That's our country's biggest domestic problem in a nutshell.<BR/><BR/>Your quotes and references are great, and you pulled them all together really well. <BR/><BR/>Nicely done.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28785049.post-1154257451940193892006-07-30T07:04:00.000-04:002006-07-30T07:04:00.000-04:00Ken McKim is the Republican candidate for State Se...Ken McKim is the Republican candidate for State Senate from the 50th (my) district. He wrote this, which is one of the reasons I voted for him in the primary election:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.northcarolinaconservative.com/archives.php?subaction=showfull&id=1133491804&archive=1135784520&start_from=&ucat=&" REL="nofollow">Riparian Seizure (Buffer Zones)</A><BR/><BR/>"The citizens of North Carolina face the same predicament, unable to use their own land because of government seizure through riparian buffer zones. The proponents of the buffer zones show no signs of stopping, and without resistance from the people, seizures will continue. Groups like Environmental Defense are not even close to their ultimate goal of 328-foot buffers."<BR/><BR/>"But today’s environmentalists have much to learn from their presumed forefather. Biodiversity is not a quantifiable goal, and is constantly changing, but personal property rights are sacred. Farmers and homeowners in North Carolina have the right to use their land as they see fit. Two centuries ago, government seizures without just compensation were offensive even to the quintessential naturalist himself. And they are offensive today to an informed North Carolina citizenry."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28785049.post-1154235861666464612006-07-30T01:04:00.000-04:002006-07-30T01:04:00.000-04:00Everyone whose words you quote in this column is w...Everyone whose words you quote in this column is well worthy of quoting! They all believed in a handful (but a <I>powerful</I> handful) of inalienable rights, and they all believed that the right to private property was high on the list of those human rights with which government must not have the ability to interfere.<BR/><BR/>Your Locke quote, especially, laid the foundation for our early (and justified) veneration of property rights. He often wrote about the sanctity of man’s right to life, liberty and property.<BR/><BR/>I, for one, believe that our Founders’ (albeit small) divergence from Locke’s wording in his magnificent treatises on liberty was a dilution rather than an improvement.<BR/><BR/>Rather than referring to <I>the pursuit of happiness</I>, I wish the Founders had acceded to the ‘right to property’ wording instead, as it appears in several other colonial documents, following Locke's example. Under the rights established by the First Continental Congress: Declaration of Colonial Rights (1774), the first ‘right’ established for the English Colonies in North America is <I>that they are entitled to life, liberty, and property, and they have never ceded to any sovereign power whatever a right to dispose of either without their consent</I>. And Boston's 1772 Rights of the Colonists echoed the same: <I>Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First, a right to life; secondly to liberty; thirdly to property.</I> <BR/><BR/>North Carolina’s overstepping of its prescribed bounds is being reflected all over the country. I daresay the legislatures of every state in the country have floated trial balloons that involved overstepping their designated powers, and declaring some aspect of private property to be under their domain. Whether they succeed in making those trial balloons fly almost always depends on the public outrage they cause, or the power and influence of judges they have amassed in their corner. <BR/><BR/>This is a great piece of research, molded into a powerful, logical argument for the preservation of individual property rights. Well done!<BR/><BR/>~ joanieAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28785049.post-1154226583152793412006-07-29T22:29:00.000-04:002006-07-29T22:29:00.000-04:00This is a good example of government thinking it o...This is a good example of government thinking it owns the air we breathe, and it will be glad to let us breathe it if we just pay them for the privilege.<BR/><BR/>Good job of fact finding and compiling.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com