« Getting Technical | Home | I wonder if PETA peeps would implode ... »
April 24, 2007
Bill of No Rights
Poasted by gekko at 12:10 PM and filed under 
"Politik Inkorrecta"
This guy. He's a man after my own heart. I wanna have his lurve child.
We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden, delusional and other liberal, bedwetters. We hold these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of people were confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of No Rights.
ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone - not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big-screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You don't have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won't lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you'd like. However, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat.
ARTICLE IX: You don't have the right to a job. All of us sure want all of you to have one, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.
ARTICLE X: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to pursue happiness - which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
-- Libertarian writer and former U.S. Senate candidate Lewis Napper ca 1993
Tagz: Politics, Rant
7 comments make for a lot of heat
http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/lewisnapper.jpg
I dunno, Gek. I think you can do better...
But yeah, all that shit he said was cool.
I'm with Paula. Feeling entitled to a life of material wealth is not the same as needing some help because health or school system has failed a person. Articles IV and IX don't sit well with me. Re IV: I have a friend who is chronically ill, one of those auto-immune diseases that show up regardless of lifestyle choices. She would like to work when her illness allows, but the rules of SSDI make it impossible for her without losing benefits when she can't work. Re IX: I have no higher education or vocational training but I have worked since high school. Why shouldn't I get a (entry level) job knowing only what the public (and required by law) school system taught me?
I am reasonably certain we all here can readily distinguish between "right" and "obligation." Further, the concept of "entitlement", which substantially differs from "right."
Anyone who is capable of exercising the innate (and governmentally permitted) rights also bears the obligation to help those who are incapable of exercising those rights.
That obligation does not confer upon (generic) you an additional right -- it is not your right to have me feed or house you when you are incapable. Your right is to have freedom to pursue food and housing and legally balanced access to those items, but you're supposed to be able to get them yourself. You may do that by asking someone to get them for you. You may end up getting them because I am willing to work to provide them for you. Or you may miss out on them because the world can be a fucked up place.
For (IX) ... why indeed? You probably should. You do not have a right to that job. The employer has the ability to determine the qualifications he requires for those he hires. If he unfairly chooses only those who have a degree, he may be a fuckwit.
Societally, I believe we also bear an obligation to apply pressure on people to step up to all of their obligations, including fair hiring practices. If you, lacking a degree, nevertheless qualify to do the work, then your lack of degree is a formality that the employer should be pressured to overlook.
Yadda.
A right without an obligation is meaningless. If I have the right to vote, then the government is obligated to give me a way to do so. If they say, neener, we're not setting up any polling places or mailing out any ballots, then I can't exercise my right. When I say obligation, I don't mean moral I mean legal, so it follows that I believe Americans have the right to food and shelter. Jobs are trickier. I support the right of employers to hire and fire at will (protected classes excepted). If some company has an arbitrary policy of hiring only peeps with a degree in underwater basketweaving, so be it. We can call them fuckheads though.
Ah, but see, I disagree that we have a right to food and shelter. We have the right to freely attempt to obtain those -- not be hampered by law in pursuit of the acquisition of same. If you own an orchard, and I do not, I do not have the right to walk in and grab your apples. The government ought not be able to force you to give me your apples. The government should not prohibit me from bartering with you for your apples, nor prohibit you from giving them to me freely or for a price.
If I am incapable of working (i.e. not just lazy) to be able to afford to purchase your apples, or reimburse you for your apples, or get an orchard of my own, or wotever, then it behooves you and others like you to provide me with a way to get the apples to sustain me. If you fail to do that, I'll probably die of mal-apple-trition and won't that be a shame? I'll prolly haunt your orchard then.
I'll agree on much of this, and much of what I don't agree on can be filed under the caveat Gekko states - "you may miss out on them because the world can be a fucked up place."
I confess I am amused by how the heinously idealistic libertarians tend to bristle in the face of liberalism.
Post a comment
Leave a comment
©Copyright 2002-2007 gekkoGrafx.com -- All Rights Reserved
I'd rather that we're a bit obligated to help one another. I don't mind paying taxes to avoid seeing people starving to death in the streets.