Archive for libertarianism
For those of you who did not watch President Obama’s State of the Union address, you can read a transcript here, as I have. I neither watched it nor the five earlier addresses he gave. And neither did I watch any of Bush’s State of the Union addresses. Actually, I have never wasted my time watching any president’s State of the Union address.
I have always loathed Obama for his radical associations, his life spent in the service of racial preference, his aberrant Christianity, and his belief in the redistribution of wealth. I loathed Obama when he was in the Senate for being one of the most radical left-wing Senators in history. And I have loathed him as president for his corporatism, warmongering, contempt for the Constitution, Obamacare, and expanding the welfare/warfare/national security/surveillance state. In fact, if you substitute Bushcare (the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003) for Obamacare, these are the same reasons I loathed George W. Bush.
This does not mean, however, that we should just dismiss outright all of the proposals Obama made in his State of the Union address—and especially those that relate to taxes.
“The real glory is being knocked to your knees and then coming back. That’s real glory. That’s the essence of it.” – Vince Lombardi
Many of life’s lessons can be learned while playing football. My son’s youth football league, for example, enforces rules to manufacture more “competitive” games. When a team is behind by more than four touchdowns it automatically begins all its offensive possessions from its opponent’s 40 yard line. To ease matters, the clock is also run continuously to shorten the game. Finally, if a team wins by more than 43 points, its head coach is suspended for a game.
Supporters might argue that these rules teach sportsmanship. Such sportsmanship, however, is involuntary – it is made compulsory by directive. Knute Rockne, Notre Dame’s legendary head coach, once remarked, “One man practicing sportsmanship is better than a hundred men teaching it.” Players only learn sportsmanship and compassion when they choose to practice leniency against a defeated opponent. Read More→
LCC author Doug Douma is now an admin on the Gordon H. Clark Foundation website. Dr. Clark (1902-1985) was a prominent Calvinist philosopher as well as a supporter of libertarian political theory. Doug’s goals for the site include transcribing and posting unpublished articles from Dr. Clark’s personal papers. Although Dr. Clark wrote primarily in the area of epistemology (the philosophy of knowledge) he also wrote on topics of political science.
Of likely interest to LCC readers is the most recently posted unpublished article of Dr. Clark’s entitled Perspective on Natural Law.
Speaking of the advantage of a Christian basis for natural rights, Dr. Clark writes: “The idea of natural rights is not the kind of concept which has legs of its own to stand on; as a deduction from religious premises it makes sense, otherwise not.” Whether or not one agrees with Clark’s conclusion, one must agree that it is challenging and interesting to consider. Dr. Clark continues:
“The Natural Law concept is more than a tool for lawyers. It is an indispensable concept for the proponent of liberty and limited government and, as liberty comes to seem more precious and popular disillusionment with political panaceas become more acute, we may expect to see increasing reliance on the Natural Law philosophy as an indispensable means for achieving a sounder society, one more in harmony with the eternal verities and the accumulated wisdom of the race.”
Doug is also currently engaged in researching and writing Dr. Clark’s biography. Doug also recently spoke about Gordon Clark at the first annual Christians For Liberty Conference, and we will be posting his talk here as soon as it is available. We can all be very proud of Doug’s fervor for original research in theology and liberty, and LCC will continue to provide updates regarding his progress periodically.
During debate, red herring statements are designed to distract hearers from better made arguments. Although irrelevant, red herrings appear so nearly germane to a topic that they are frequently accepted as evidence by all but the most discerning listener.
When discussing the death penalty, two “conservative” red herrings are frequently offered. If asked whether the death penalty should remain a sentencing option, individuals often assert that some crimes deserve the harshest penalty imaginable. Additionally, there are criminals who cannot be rehabilitated – prison will not instigate the behavior change for which it is designed. These statements can be accepted as true.
Furthermore, Christians acknowledge that God – the Creator of life – includes provisions for the death penalty in his revealed word. The Pentateuch commands the death penalty for murder (Numbers 35: 16), adultery (Leviticus 20: 10), blasphemy (Leviticus 24: 14) and numerous other crimes. Again, this assertion can be accepted as true.
Although these statements are factual, they remain red herrings. The capital punishment debate asks whether the state should be permitted to intentionally end life as a means of punishment. Responses which affirm that some crimes deserve death, that some criminals cannot be rehabilitated, and that the death penalty is included in the Bible appear compelling, but they evade the question. Read More→
Today, being the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, is election day. Aside from the fact that I don’t vote, and therefore couldn’t even vote for myself, there are a number of reasons why I could never be elected to office—any office: federal, state, or local.
Not in any particular order, here are twenty-five of them.
1. The war on drugs is a monstrous evil that has destroyed more lives than drugs themselves. It should be ended immediately. All drugs should immediately be legalized, not just marijuana. Everyone in prison solely on drug charges should be released immediately.
2. U.S. foreign policy is reckless, belligerent, and meddling, and has been for over 100 years. The United States should strictly adhere to the foreign policy of Thomas Jefferson: “Peace, commerce, honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none.”
3. Since the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to have anything to do with education, there should be no federal student loans, Pell grants, Department of Education, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, school breakfast or lunch programs, Head Start funding, math and science initiatives, etc. On the state level, there should be no public schools. Education should be a market service just like car repair and haircuts. However, since every state has a provision in its constitution for the operation of K-12 schools, they should have as much local control as possible.