MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘We the People’

Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity-Smackdown! Homeschool ‘Park Patriots’ Vs. Brazoria County Park Closures

Posted by M. C. on May 29, 2020

Earlier this month, a group of homeschoolers mobilized and began challenging the ridiculous closures of playgrounds throughout Brazoria County through direct action.

Ironic how the officer with “We The People” tattooed across his arm showed up with such contempt for the actual people. One of the homeschool fathers hit the perfect note when he reminded the officer that it was in fact the park itself that belonged to the same “We The People” he was wearing on his arm.

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/

Written by Daniel McAdams

As we’ve been saying on the Ron Paul Liberty Report for some time, in this period of coronavirus and the naked power-grabs by authoritarian politicians from all levels of government, if there is any hope to claw back some of our liberties it will come from the bottom up.

Politicians are drunk on power and they are not about to enter any kind of 12 step program.

But throughout the country it is the people who are fighting back. And they are scoring tremendous victories. On a small scale, a hundred flowers are blooming daily as Americans who perhaps yesterday were not at all political, or who went along to get along, are realizing what is at stake and are standing up.

The elites laughed at the “flyover country” folks in places like the Lake of the Ozarks who ignored demands that they practice “social distancing” and wear masks in public over Memorial Day weekend and simply went out and had a good time. In fact the elites and the sycophants openly wished these people would contract Covid and die as punishment for ignoring the orders of their “betters.”

That’s how sick things have become.

Here in Texas the speaker of the house Dennis Bonnen – ostensibly a conservative Republican – has warned us lowly citizens that if we want big daddy government to allow us to conduct business again in this state, we need to bow down and scrape.

He told USA Today that if we don’t wear masks whenever we go outside, we can’t have our freedom back:

I don’t know what message they are sending other than the message of stupidity that they’re not going to wear a face covering in public. Well, pick it. Either you want the economy open or you want to be selfish and not wear a face covering when you are out in the public.

The corrupt Dennis Bonnen may think he can push Texans around, but perhaps he’s had his own mask on too tight and is suffering from hypoxia.

Down here in Brazoria county a strong independent spirit runs through the vibrant and active homeschool movement. In fact Texas homeschoolers and particularly Brazoria County homeschoolers have been the backbone of Ron Paul country.

Earlier this month, a group of homeschoolers mobilized and began challenging the ridiculous closures of playgrounds throughout Brazoria County through direct action.

It is the most outrageous abuse of power to deny children the ability to go outside in the sun, help virus-killing vitamin D to flow through their systems, and get the exercise that is most directly associated with a healthy immune system and resistance to coronavirus.

Government restricting children from that which keeps them healthy is not “science” – it’s criminal.

So this group, the “Park Patriots,” took action. First they descended on a park in Lake Jackson, Ron Paul’s hometown, and after the city workers called the police on them they gave the police a lesson in the law and law enforcement. They ended up at city hall and successfully got the vice mayor to admit that there was no force of law behind the forced shutdown of parks. Officials pretended they had the authority to deny citizens the facilities they were forced to pay for, but in the end a “guideline” is quite different than a law.

The mothers returned to the park and let their kids loose on the playground. Victory indeed.

Today the “Park Patriots” struck again, trudging up to Angleton’s “Freedom Park” to again let their homeschooled kids loose on the taped up playground – and to reclaim their freedom.

As they arrived they began dismantling the tape and the other impediments to children using the facilities:

undefined

The orange fencing keeping children from enjoying the park that their parents paid for ended up exactly where it belonged:

undefined

One of the children – in this case your author’s own daughter – relished the idea of smashing through the ridiculous “caution” tape on the swings:

undefined

Once again it was city workers who called the police on the people who pay their salaries – notice a pattern here? – and soon enough some squad cars showed up.

undefined

What followed was the greatest example of how citizens can reclaim their own liberty by simply standing up to authoritarians. By simply working up the courage to say, “we’re not going to take this anymore.” Here is a short video of the essence of the exchange between the homeschool mothers and fathers of Brazoria County when the police tried to strong-arm them to leave the park:

Ironic how the officer with “We The People” tattooed across his arm showed up with such contempt for the actual people. One of the homeschool fathers hit the perfect note when he reminded the officer that it was in fact the park itself that belonged to the same “We The People” he was wearing on his arm.

Also of interest is that when the officer’s falsely asserted authority to remove the children from the park was obliterated by the excellent rhetoric of the parents, how only response was the bizarre “y’all anti-vaxxers?” Bad move, officer!

Finally, the officer, totally defeated by the arguments of the parents, turned heel and walked away, leaving his colleague dumbfounded and alone. She also turned around and walked away.

One group of parents broke off to go to the city hall to directly challenge authorities and the other group remained at the park.

Eventually the officer returned to the homeschoolers remaining at the park. He tried to act friendly at this point. “The chief of police has decided that you can remain at the park.”

Victory:

undefined

And thanks to these brave and dedicated homeschoolers, “Freedom Park” is free again:

undefined

We can all make a difference. We can all fight for our freedom, one small battle at a time. We can all help defeat the tyrants.

And finally: Don’t mess with Texas…homeschoolers!


Copyright © 2020 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The State and Heresy

Posted by M. C. on February 22, 2020

Or consider the United States. Here, “We the People” are in theory the sovereign authority, and our ruling officers are mere servants. The powers “delegated” to those servants are defined and limited by the Constitution. Must we obey them, even when they usurp powers never entrusted to them? When they claim such powers, it would seem that “they” are in rebellion against “us”, and we have no duty to obey. “Masters, obey your servants”?

Must we obey them, even when they usurp powers never entrusted to them? When they claim such powers, it would seem that “they” are in rebellion against “us,” and we have no duty to obey. “Masters, obey your servants”?

http://fgfbooks.com/Sobran-Joe/2020/Sobran200223.html

A classic by Joe Sobran
Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation

Sobran’s: The Real News of the Month, March 2002 — In recent weeks I’ve been debating with people I usually agree with: conservative Christians. Many of them feel I’ve gone too far in the direction of philosophical anarchism, in defiance of both Scripture and Catholic teaching.

Many people feel I’ve gone too far in the direction of philosophical anarchism, in defiance of both Scripture and Catholic teaching.

One reader, a self-identified Catholic socialist, went so far as to call my views “heresy.” He cited particularly the encyclicals of Leo XIII and Pius XI. His e-mail message was so intelligent, provocative, and yet charitable that I answered him at some length, and we have had a long, friendly exchange ever since. We’re still arguing, and neither of us is backing down.

“You must all obey the governing authorities. Since all government comes from God, the civil authorities were appointed by God, and so anyone who resists authority is rebelling against God’s decision, and such an act is bound to be punished. …The state is there to serve God for your benefit.” – Romans 13: 1-4

I’ve also been in touch with an old Protestant friend, now a minister, whom I haven’t seen since high school. He too thinks Christian doctrine requires submission to government, and he argues his case with a power and sophistication I find especially impressive, considering the level of our old Scripture-banging arguments in our school days.

But this interpretation, though obvious at first sight, soon raises difficulties for Christians. After all, the Christian martyrs — including Paul himself — lived under pagan tyrants and chose to die rather than submit to worship the emperor.

The key text for Christians is chapter 13 of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, which begins: “You must all obey the governing authorities. Since all government comes from God, the civil authorities were appointed by God, and so anyone who resists authority is rebelling against God’s decision, and such an act is bound to be punished. Good behavior is not afraid of magistrates; only criminals have anything to fear…. The state is there to serve God for your benefit.” This is from the Jerusalem Bible; the more familiar King James Version says that “the powers that be are ordained of God.”

St. Thomas Aquinas agreed with Augustine that a positive law that clashed with divine or natural law was unjust and void — a principle that might invalidate most statutes on the books.

Many Christians quote this passage to support the view that we owe allegiance and obedience to the government. But this interpretation, though obvious at first sight, soon raises difficulties for Christians. After all, the Christian martyrs — including Paul himself — lived under pagan tyrants and chose to die rather than submit to worship the emperor. Paul is thought to have died during Nero’s persecution.

Over two millennia …Christians have been forced to grapple with many questions: What is a state? How do we recognize its authority? What are its limits?

Later Christian political thought was extremely varied and complex. But St. Augustine took a dark view of earthly government, which, with slavery and war, he deemed a consequence of original sin. St. Thomas Aquinas held that even unfallen man would need government (as even good drivers need traffic laws), but he agreed with Augustine that a positive law that clashed with divine or natural law was unjust and void — a principle that might invalidate most statutes on the books.

Can we distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate states? Is rebellion ever justified? Must the state defer to the Church? Must the Church obey the state?

Over two millennia, pagan states were replaced by Christian states, which gave way to secularist states. During all this time Christians have been forced to grapple with many questions: What is a state? How do we recognize its authority? What are its limits? Can we distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate states? Is rebellion ever justified? Must the state defer to the Church? Must the Church obey the state? All these difficult questions have been further complicated by the experience of barbarian conquests, feudalism, monarchism, religious divisions, dynastic quarrels, republican constitutionalism, capitalism, nationalism, industrialism, mass democracy, dictatorship, Marxism, totalitarianism, the welfare state, and of course war, particularly total war.

Today almost nobody holds the position of Romans 13 in its full rigor, if that means a duty of unqualified submission to whatever regime happens to exist. Nearly all Christians distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate regimes.

Today almost nobody holds the position of Romans 13 in its full rigor, if that means a duty of unqualified submission to whatever regime happens to exist. Nearly all Christians distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate regimes; if rebellion is always a sin, how can we have a duty to obey the successful rebel when he assumes power? Must we obey the tsar one day, and the Lenin who topples him the next? Does Paul mean to say: “Thou shalt obey anyone who holds coercive power over thee”?

Here, “We the People” are in theory the sovereign authority, and our ruling officers are mere servants. The powers “delegated” to those servants are defined and limited by the Constitution.

Or consider the United States. Here, “We the People” are in theory the sovereign authority, and our ruling officers are mere servants. The powers “delegated” to those servants are defined and limited by the Constitution. Must we obey them, even when they usurp powers never entrusted to them? When they claim such powers, it would seem that “they” are in rebellion against “us”, and we have no duty to obey. “Masters, obey your servants”?

Must we obey them, even when they usurp powers never entrusted to them? When they claim such powers, it would seem that “they” are in rebellion against “us,” and we have no duty to obey. “Masters, obey your servants”?

When there are so many kinds of states, some of them mutually incompatible, the only defining trait they share is the claim of a legal monopoly of coercion. Paul doesn’t assert that brute power constitutes a right to command and compel. He must mean something else. But what?

Paul says the civil authorities serve God, and Christians can obey the law and be good citizens by simply keeping the Commandments.

He says the civil authorities serve God, and Christians can obey the law and be good citizens by simply keeping the Commandments. Were these words meant to ward off suspicions that Christians were subversive and to encourage them to respect human law, at least insofar as it conformed to God’s law?

Paul may have been subtly implying that Christians are “not” morally bound to cooperate with tyranny.

If so, Paul’s words may carry an ironic meaning that would escape the Roman authorities. By positing a just government — very unlike the rule of Nero — he may have been subtly implying that Christians are “not” morally bound to cooperate with tyranny.

If that’s what he meant, maybe I’m not such a heretic after all!

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »