Mental Brushfire

A Biblical view of women's rights

2012-01-27T00:15:00.000-08:00

As an atheist I often encounter manyChristians who wish to challenge my distaste for religion. I don'tmind discussing religion with the faithful, but I experience aprofound sense of irony when I run across Christian women who defendtheir faith so vigorously.

Littered throughout the Bible youcan find a great many stories and passages that should horrify andastound the conscience of any decent person,. Among these, I would like to draw your attention to thebook of Genesis where we see a pattern emerge that weaves itselfthrough the whole of scripture all the way to the New Testament.

In Genesis chapter 3 we come across thefamous story most of us know very well of Eve and the serpent. In this account Eve falls prey to the wiles of the serpent, who is aniconic representation of the devil. At his behest, she eats the fruit of theforbidden Tree of Knowledge.

Sullying her own immortal soul wasnot enough, for Eve then tempted Adam who also ate of the fruit, and forthis crime they were cast out of God's presence and cursed.

Because of this story, women were givena lesser status than men in ancient Jewish culture. In more moderntimes the phrase “lesser sex” has been used to describe womenbecause Eve was so easily tricked by the serpent. The underlying tones hereseem to imply that age old prejudice that women are not quite assmart as men, because of Eve's susceptibility to being fooled by thedevil.

If one continues to read scripturemoving on to the other 4 books in the Pentateuch, we can see thisview of women translated into abject slavery and debasement.

Even God had a disdain for women as heonly allows males to come into his presence in the Temple.(Deuteronomy 16:16 )

It does not stop there, however, and wesee many laws laid out that favor a male dominated society. According to the laws of the Jewish people given by God, men areallowed to have as many wives as they choose, but a woman must remainfaithful to one man. This is, of course, another irony in of itself as many right wing Christians make the claim that allowing gay marriage will lead down a slippery slope to bigamy and polygamy. Try not to laugh too hard the next time you hear Christian politicians like Rick Santorum make this argument.

It goes on...

If a man decides he no longer desireshis wife he can go to her father and request the “tokens of hervirginity”, which are bloody sheets, and if he cannot produce themshe is to be taken out and stoned.(Deuteronomy 22:13-21 )

In another passage women may be put todeath for not crying out loud enough while being raped.(Deuteronomy22:24 )

Probably the most despicable of allthese is the allowance for the raping of an unbetrothed virgin solong as the man pays her father and marries her. That's right...therape victim must marry her rapist.(Deuteronomy 22:28,29 )

It becomes painfully clear that women,according to God's plan in the Torah, are nothing more thanchildbearing property with rights that barely give them status aboveslaves.

It is true that we see several women ofnote in the Old Testament which includes Ruth and Esther. These areheroins of the Bible and often referred to as glowing examples ofgodly women.

Even though these stories seem a bit lighter than theprevious passages, we still see evidence of the status women hadunder Biblical law. Ruth herself was purchased by her husband Boazlike a piece of property.(Ruth 4:10)

The story of Esther is about a womanwho's beauty gave her status with a king. In Esther chapter 2 we seethat she was able to “please” the king and thus win his favor. Basically, Esther objectified herself through her sexuality and thusbecame someone of note.

Sleeping your way to the top is certainly not a lesson I would ever teach mytwo daughters.

This trend continues in the NewTestament with the writings of Paul during the days of the earlychurch. In two places we see the opinion of Paul on how women shouldbehave in the Church. In 1st Corinthians 14:34 women are told to besilent in church and obey the law of Moses.

In 1 Timothy 2:12 women are forbiddento teach men or have authority in the church over men. Once againthe concept of the “lesser sex” rears its head.

Now you can come up with all kinds ofexcuses and special pleading to rationalize these verses and you maybe able to find some references in scripture that contradict thispattern, but the pattern is overwhelmingly clear: If you are a woman,the Bible is not very favorable of your status as an equal participantin society.

In fact, these passages were the basisfor the suppression of women's rights in Western society for hundreds of years. Even to this day women suffer discrimination in nearlyevery culture due to the dominance of similar patriarchal beliefs.

This is why I find a sense of irony inChristian women defending the Bible and a God who views them as lessthan a man. It is even stranger that they violate their ownscripture and attempt to teach me as a man.

I am almost certain that someone willbe offended when they read this and accuse me of some sort ofbigotry, but when I think of what I would want for my two daughters, I find the Bible an abhorrent text. I will keep them far away from any belief that supports the subjugation of their dignity to the teachings of a religion which tells them they are the "lesser sex".

I would truly hope that if my girls were to one daypick up the Bible and read the words contained within, they would doas any strong and independently minded woman should do, and discardit in the nearest trash receptacle.

We are all Africans

2012-01-22T14:35:00.000-08:00

While I was out having a drink with a friend the other day, a gentleman sat down next to us and interjected himself into a conversation my friend and I were having. At one point, the conversation shifted to the topic of racism and he drunkenly declared, in a rather bellicose manner, that, “We are all racists!”

This is a phrase that one hears quite frequently nowadays, often by those who hold some degree of racially biased opinions. While it may seem harmless on it's face, this rhetorical assertion is a dishonest appraisal of the relatively common bias within human culture, and breeds a tolerance for racially biased points of view that deserve no respect, whatsoever.

We all possess a tendency, due to our genetic and societal evolution, to identify by group. In our days as hunter gatherers when food was not easy to come by, identifying with the right group meant life or death and this fostered the genetic traits that gave us this feature.

In modern society, this tendency reveals itself in various ways, you can see it in sports, religion, and of course, in racial bias.

To say that we are all racist, is incorrect. It would be more accurate to say that we all have a tendency toward racism and group psychology. Knowledge about human biology and history gives us insight which can allow our conscious minds to easily overcome this side effect of our evolution.

Those of you who are openly racist or have racist feelings and seek to justify them, please do so, but not with the qualification that all others are racist, just admit you are ignorant.

If you still have trouble quelling those underlying feelings toward individuals of another nationality or race, try to remember that while we are not all racists, we are all Africans.

Education as a human right: A common defense against ignorance

2012-01-17T19:40:00.000-08:00

One of the primary responsibilities ofour government listed in the preamble of our Constitution is to“provide for the common defense”. We spend billions of taxdollars every year to fund the military, and our growing militaryexpansionism; there seems to be no end in sight to our involvement inAfghanistan and Iraq as the sabers rattle and Iran enters thecrosshairs.

If anyone dares to come near ourmilitary budget with the intent to cut spending, conservatives cry out in anger anddisgust. Straw man arguments about patriotism and American loyaltyare leveled toward anyone daring to touch our war machine with a mindon scaling back our hapless war on terror, which has cost Americans 4trillion dollars, so far, not to mention the thousands of lives ended by the ongoing violence.

Yet, one of the first arguments out ofmany of these critics mouths when faced with budget shortfalls, isnot to end our war mongering, but rather to cut education spending. It should disturb us that many Americans view the ability to kill other human beings as worthy of such voracious support but find it perfectly appealing to shred our educational budget at every opportunity.

This ghastly arrangement of prioritiesreveals some deeper questions...

What is more dangerous...a terrorist,or ignorance? Is a foreign army more dangerous than citizens whocannot name important public officials or locate Afghanistan on amap, and yet vote? Is it a mere coincidence that poor education isstatistically synonymous with poverty and human suffering?

I would argue thatignorance is as great, if not a greater enemy to our society than thethreat of any foreign war; it is the very cause of things like terrorism and mindless killing...or, if I may be so bold, vacuous war mongering. We find it necessary to protect ourselvesfrom outside danger and provide a "common defense", but in the faceof the greatest enemy of civilization many of us do not see the needto vigorously mount such a defense.

These statements are not by any means a defense of our current education system. I find much at fault with the current system, and I think that this is partly due to the way we view education as Americans, especially the way many inherently view the institution of public education with an almost reflexive and irrational disdain.

There is much debate over whether we should privatize our education system, and though I have held such ideas in the past I have come to a realization that this needs to be something provided by society and government. It is a responsibility we all share. Reforms are needed, but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater and we should strive to ensure all children receive a quality education that is not dependent on living in the right neighborhood or who your parents are.

In the U.N.Declaration of Human Rights it lists education as a basic humanright. This is a view that has yet to take hold here in America asmany tend to unjustly associate public education with socialism. Indeed, manymight find it odd that a Libertarian would hold this view, however Isee no difference in funding education and funding our military. Itfits easily into my view of human liberty and independence. I would even argue that there is no greater threat to the enlightening lumination of liberty than the groping darkness of ignorance.

Whether to vieweducation as a basic human right is not just a moral question forsociety, it is a valid argument for the betterment of mankind. It isa "common defense" by the reasoned against the very realand consequential threat of ignorance in the world.

Terrorist!

2012-01-05T06:01:00.000-08:00

Our current foreign policy is likely to play a vital role in this coming election. There is a lot of talk about invading Iran and expanding our war in the Middle East. The views of whatever candidate finds themselves elected will determine our course in these matters for the next 4 years.

There are far too many that seem eager to revel in war mongering in spite of all it has cost this nation over the last 11 years.

I came across a very potent piece of poetry by a British writer that brings into perspective the problems with our very dogmatic foreign policy and how it dehumanizes people not all that different from ourselves.

All I ask is that you think and ponder on these words and put yourself in the shoes of a father or mother in one of these Arab nations that we have invaded. Think of how you as an American might act if placed in their position, and if the shoe was on the other foot what someone might call you...

Terrorist

by Mhara Costello

Just a Word

'Terrorist' is just a word, one I wish I'd never heard

When it's used to vilify, without the need to question why

Only fools would swift condemn, that which has not befallen them

Until you know what lies behind, the actions of a tortured mind

Thank your God for sparing you, the suffering others have lived through

Where are the cries of just demand, for Arabs driven from their land?

Blame the victim, turn the cheek, praise the bully, kick the weak!

Mock the man who truth does speak

Tinker, tailor, soldier, spy, greed, corruption, torture, lies!

Blair invasion, sly persuasion, annihilation, massacred nation

Keep on running, karma's coming!

Money talks, truth walks, oil spills, greed kills

Tide is turning, London's burning!

Bombs will fall and blood will flow, as sure as my own name I know

Until corrupt dictators go, brutal, rotten, to the core

Their day has come, they rule no more

Show me the man who will not fight, to save his child, his home, his right!

You can call him what you like, you're not in his sorry plight

Cowards stay and Martyrs go, I know not where, but this I know

Speak your truth and stand your ground, fight your corner

When all around, point the finger, purse the lips, pin the label, 'Terrorist'!

Just a word, but one that sticks, even when the cap don't fit

But for the grace of God go I, remember that, before you cry

False accusation, names of shame, at those who may not be to blame,

Their crime, refused to play the game, of meek acceptance, dumbing down,

Your life, your choice; Warrior / Clown

Cheap Ticket: My thoughts on the death of Christopher Hitchens and the response by Christians

2011-12-17T21:29:00.001-08:00

As Paul drives down the old dirt road his mind is focused. His senses are alert and heightened to their peak as he makes his way to his destination.

Arriving, he exits the vehicle; a thumping sound can be heard coming from his trunk. He turns casually to open it and looks down to see a young girl, about 17 years old, bound up in nylon rope with an old rag shoved in her mouth. For a moment he pauses and then a smile widens across his face as a feeling of exhilaration passes through his body.

His pulse races faster as he pulls her from the trunk into an old wooden building. He removes the gag and she lets out a desperate scream which soon turns into a pathetic plea for her release. Instead of invoking feelings of compassion, as it would in most normal individuals, this only serves to excite him more.

He unties her, as if to let her go, and as she tries for the exit he lands a blow to the side of her head, knocking her to the ground. As she lays there in a half daze, he proceeds to rape her repeatedly, hitting her every time she attempts to struggle. After a while, she surrenders to him and when the fight has finally gone out of her, he calmly walks to a nearby table and picks up a hammer.

She welcomes her fate as he finishes his grizzly task and everything goes dark.

A few weeks later, some good tips have led police down this same road where they find the poor young girl, buried under a shallow mound of dirt in the nearby forest. They capture and arrest Paul shortly after. Soon, more bodies are found and he eventually confesses to over fourteen killings, all young girls ranging from 16 to 19 years old.

After a lengthy trial and several appeals, Paul finds himself on death row awaiting his own fate. Several days before he is to be put to death, a priest visits him in his cell and reads some passages of Scripture and Paul decides to say the sinner's prayer and ask God to forgive him of his sins. The priest gives him a nod as tears stream down Paul's face, all is forgiven, Paul has been washed in the blood of the lamb and is blameless in the eyes of God.

Days later when the sentence is being carried out, the priest appears on a news talk show covering the execution. He tells the story of this murderers conversion and testifies to the greatness of God and the power of his forgiveness. Pastors around the country use this story in their sermons on Sunday to tell their congregations of the wondrous power of God's salvation through Jesus Christ.

Though the story above is not an account of real events, one would not have to search far to find similar real life stories, like that of the famous serial killer Jeffery Dahmer who converted to Christianity in prison after being sentenced for killing, eating, and committing unspeakable acts upon the bodies of 17 men and boys.

The disturbing thing about these miraculous conversions is that they seem to leave no room for the justice promised by God in the New Testament in 2 Thessalonians chapter 1 verse 6, which says, "For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you,".

Indeed, if one takes Christian theology literally, it is quite possible for killers like these to be rewarded in heaven while their victims rot in eternal suffering.

This Thursday, the world bid farewell to journalist and writer, Christopher Hitchens. This man had dedicated his career as a journalist to help his fellow man and decry violations of civil rights around the world. He never killed anyone. He had his vices as we all do, but he contributed greatly to the intellectual advancement and awakening of his fellow man. He was also an outspoken atheist.

The reason I have created the fictional story above is to draw a contrast. Over the last few days there have been various postings by Christians taking the opportunity to expound on their belief that Mr. Hitchens is burning in hell for his rejection of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Some have even gone so far as to compare him to cold blooded murderers, saying that because he did not repent, he is now equal to all evil men and women that have passed into hell without the forgiveness of God.

In their eyes, the man in my story above is of greater value to their God than any of the greatest humanist philanthropists or great atheist scientists of our time.

There could be no greater method than this to show the utter failings of Christian belief at their most basic level. In attempting to celebrate life though the grace of God through Christ Jesus they have cheapened it to the point where it becomes worthless and devoid of any real intrinsic value.

Honor, goodness, and compassion mean nothing because you can commit any number of awful and horrific acts, as long as you say a few repentant words before you sail off into the afterlife.

The deeds and actions of truly good men and women, those who do what is right for the sake of its own merits, are meaningless and their penalty for daring to reject such a loving God will earn them eternal punishment.

There could be no more vile and wretched way of viewing the world. Good and evil become equals and moral codes serve no purpose in the face of regret spoken with a few magic words. It seems quite ironic for a religion that claims to hold morality in such high regard, to mutilate and degrade it by making it worthless in the grand scheme of eternal justice.

In the Christian mind, when two lives meet their end, it is not the compassionate and humanitarian atheist that holds the greatest value, it is the repentant murdering rapist who they hold in the highest esteem.

I sit, dumfounded, at this glaring contradiction and the joyful relish with which all that is good in this world is cast down into the moral dung heap of humanity to be viewed as equal with the most heinous evils of our species.

If entry into heaven is bought with so cheap a ticket...is it worth even considering the trip?

A very Perry Christmas letter

2011-12-14T21:06:00.000-08:00

On December 6th Rick Perry's campaign released an ad named "Strong", in which the Texas governor said the following:

“I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm a Christian, but you don't need to be in the pew every Sunday to know there's something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can't openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school. As President, I'll end Obama's war on religion. And I'll fight against liberal attacks on our religious heritage. Faith made America strong. It can make her strong again. I'm Rick Perry and I approve this message.“

Firstly, I must take the time to appreciate the unintended humor of his opening line. I guess in Perry's mind associating with the beliefs of 75% of Americans is somehow a bold and daring move, but in reality, openly expressing your Christian faith in America as a politician is not something noteworthy, it is simply a transparent attempt to use faith to pander for votes.

For a real act of courage, I would suggest he try coming out as a Muslim or an atheist in the Deep South.

I am sure that to some Christian fundamentalists these words were met with acceptance and appreciation, but to the rest of us with a very human sense of empathy and compassion they caused great offense, as is evidenced by the fact that Perry's campaign ad is now one of the most disliked videos ever posted on the internet video site, Youtube.

The outright bigotry toward men and women who risk their lives for their country is only part of Perry's blunderous absurdity. His assertion that children cannot openly celebrate Christmas is not only a gross mischaracterization, but an outright lie.

One needs only walk down any street of any town or city in America to see people, adults and children alike, celebrating Christmas openly with a varying array of decorations, which include Christian nativity scenes. Interestingly enough, there are no authorities knocking on any of these homes demanding that they take down their decorations.

Perhaps Perry, in his ignorance, forgot that not everyone celebrates the holidays in the same way, and as far as government is concerned, Christmas is a non-sectarian holiday part of a season with many different cultural celebrations by Jews, pagans, African Americans, and many others.

To heap more coal on the fires of his own ignorance, Perry goes on to say that our children cannot pray in school. This is a lie that has been spouted by far right Christians for some time now and deserves a rebuttal.

Contrary to the mental image painted by fundamentalists of Nazi like teachers forbidding students the right to pray, no one is going to haul little Johnny off to detention if he bows his head and prays over his lunch in the cafeteria. However, it is inappropriate for teachers or school officials to lead a prayer over lunch. Kids can even form religious clubs and pray together. What is not allowed, is the favored expression of one belief over others in an official capacity.

This leads me to the conclusion that what people like Perry want is not simply the right to free expression, they have that in spades; they want a favored status for their beliefs above those of others.

Being that the movement to allow school sponsored prayer is primarily and overwhelmingly Christian, one could be led to ask what purpose this serves in our school or government functions that demands its necessity.

In Matthew 6 Jesus says, "When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners [d]so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you."

Adding to the question above, and applying the words of Christ, one might also ask what Christian purpose is to be found in shoving your religious expressions where they arguably don't belong.

I would encourage those of you out there reading this that happen to agree with Perry's sentiments to re-read the First Amendment which says that the government shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion, which includes such actions as making the book of Leviticus into law and discriminating against homosexual individuals using religious moral arguments.

If you wish to persist in the notion that this is by definition a “Christian Nation” founded upon the Bible, I would suggest that you show me where in your scripture it outlines the Greek and pagan ideas for a Republican model of government. Better yet, you may, perhaps, read the words of our Founders who stated with a great deal of clarity in the Treaty of Tripoli that “the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion... “

If we can, let's be honest about what Perry and many other members of the Christian right mean when they say "faith". They mean Christian faith. This would become abundantly clear to anyone that happens to attend a Christian Coalition event and read their materials. They feel it is their right to establish the Christian religion as the dominant faith in America through political action.

It should cause all of us deep concern when the purveyors of a particular religion start speaking in this fashion.

Despite popular misconceptions and modern attempts by Christian Reconstructionists to rewrite history, our original motto was not “In God We Trust”. It was changed in 1956 along with our pledge of allegiance to add references to God as result of the Red Scare. Our original motto was “E pluribus unum” which translates to “Out of many, one”. Our strength, as our Founders saw it, was not in our collective adherence to a religion, but in our ability to put aside our personal beliefs to ensure the freedoms of all people.

This holiday season lets not allow small minded people like Mr. Perry separate us from the very self-evident truths enshrined in our Declaration of Independence, that every one of us is entitled to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, no matter what we believe or who we love.

Happy Holidays.

Faith, Family, and Death

2011-12-11T00:48:00.000-08:00

Startled awake I answer the phone. Groggily, I start to become coherent enough to recognize my mother's voice.

She sounds upset.

I ask the question knowing the answer before it was given, “Grandma is dead, isn't she?”

It wasn't very omniscient of me to draw that conclusion as she had been sick for quite some time fighting cancer and my mother was calling me so early in the morning...what else could it be?

Over the last two years my grandmother had fought off Hodgkin's lymphoma and shortly after, gone through heart bypass surgery, only to have her cancer come back with a vengeance.

At the funereal, I can remember hearing accounts repeated by family of how they found my grandmother sitting in her chair, a Bible in her lap, with a look of peace on her face. This seemed to bring comfort to most of them in their time of sorrow. They took solace in knowing that she was with Jesus and he was wiping the tears from her face as she enjoyed her eternal reward in heaven.

I was at a place in my life at this time where I was beginning to ask questions about my own faith. To some small extent I found immediate bliss in sharing the sentiment of others that she was somewhere better.

This copacetic feeling wasn't to last, though, as I began to process what had occurred and think more deeply on the reality of what her death would come to mean for me.

My grandmother was deeply religious, she was a pentecostal semi-charismatic Christian who believed in the power of God and his Holy Spirit. She spoke in tongues and spent hours in prayer seeking God's wisdom.

One of the things she believed with all her heart was that God had come to her and told her that she would live to see the day of Christ's return. She told this story often and more frequently closer to her death.

When placed in context with the story of how she was found with her Bible in her lap, my growing skepticism painted a much darker picture than the comforting idea of her going peacefully to meet her God. I instead began to see the effect of utter cruelty caused by faith on the minds of the devoted.

Let me be clear, my Grandmother honestly believed with all of her being that she would see the return of Jesus. She, like so many other Pentecostals truly believed that she could “hear” the voice of God. When I think of what that perceived promise meant to her and I picture her sitting in that chair clinging to her Bible as the cancer finished its job, I chill at the idea that she may have had a moment of clarity toward the end.

Because she believed that she would live to see the return of Christ she also had faith that God would cure her cancer. Of course, people made comments about how God took her home so she wouldn't have to suffer. This is, by the way, the same God who intelligently designed her human body to destroy itself in one of the most slow and painfully horrid ways imaginable. The same God that had given her the notion that she would live to see his return, granting her false hope. Despite all of this, God was still to be praised because he showed his mercy and now she was resting in the arms of her Lord and Savior.

At the time my Grandmother died, I numbed my intellect like everyone else with the notion that she was in a better place. Later, I would see how evil it was for the same faith which had robbed the joys of reality from my grandmother, deluding her into the palled security of false hope, to be adulated and celebrated upon her death.

My lingering faith had also robbed me of the opportunity to properly mourn my lost loved one. For, as Paul said in 1 Thessalonians 4:13, “But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. “

Now that I have shed my superstitions, I feel an anger that faith stole from me the very human experience of mourning properly. I should have embraced my sadness. I had every right to be upset at losing her. In fact, the sorrow I would have properly felt is what would have given my relationship with her the most significant meaning. To cast aside the pain of loss is to belittle the meaning of life and the intrinsic value of the person who has died.

But its not really loss if you believe in an afterlife..its just saying goodbye for a while, isn't it?

This story is significant for me because looking back I think it is what shook my belief in God to the core. For a while I wasted time with some internal anger at a non-existent God. A while later I realized the futility in hating someone who wasn't there.

This entire experience left me with a deep understanding of how evil religious indoctrination can be. I am certain that if a person of faith is reading this they may be befuddled, indifferent, or perhaps offended, but in my eyes, a belief that would tell a good woman that the voices in her head are that of a supreme being and convince her that two bouts with cancer were part of some divine plan is only shadowed in incredulity by the disgusting image of her clinging to an ancient book with sordid aspirations even up to the moment of death, that there was some purpose behind all the deluded madness.

I see her death with an even greater sadness now that I have traveled farther down this path of human awakening. I see a precious mind taken from its infancy and filled with bronze age mythology, given as truth. I see the fact that she raised my mother with that same belief who, in turn, raised me up with likewise indoctrination. I see back in time to the past where the same was done to dozens of generations of innocent children who would continue that legacy blindly walking in the faith of their ancestors, never questioning, just believing.

With that pretext, I look at my two daughters and I see their beautiful creative minds learning and exploring and with a lighthearted sadness, I take a moment to hold back the tears of realization that I will give them a future all their own so that one day they can die knowing they have lived a long, fulfilling life, not huddled in a chair clinging to a Bible praying to an empty ceiling.

U.S. Senate votes to indefinitely suspend habeas corpus

2011-11-30T20:55:00.001-08:00

On Tuesday, November, 29th, 2011, the United States Senate voted in favor of keeping an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act which gives the U.S. military the authority to detain American citizens on American soil, indefinitely, without due process in the name of fighting terrorism.

Both of our Senators from the state of Pennsylvania, Casey(D) and Toomey(R), voted in favor of this provision, that violates the clause in the 5th amendment of our Constitution, which guarantees all citizens the right to due process under the law.

To place this in context, let's take a quick look at was has occurred over the last 11 years.

After 9/11, Americans were in a collective state of fear and apprehension about the future threat of terrorist attacks on American soil. In that uncertainty, the government offered us a solution which they told us they needed to help fight these terrorists.

The problem was that this "solution" contained provisions which directly violated enumerated rights in our Constitution, including rights related to due process and search and seizure.

However, despite vehement warnings from civil libertarians about potential abuse, the Patriot Act was passed into law.

Six years later, in 2007, an audit by the Justice Department revealed serious misuse of the Patriot Act by the F.B.I. to gather private information on American citizens without proper court orders.

Fast forward to a hearing before the Senate Judiciary committee in 2009, in which Senator Feingold, from Wisconsin, quoted statistics from the Federal government in 2008 showing that “sneak and peak” warrants, a provision of the Patriot Act which circumvents due process, were used 763 times. In only 3 instances were they used in cases related to terror investigations, the rest were non-terror related cases, and 65% of them were for drug related cases.

The following year, in 2010, here in Pennsylvania, memos were leaked from the PA Department of Homeland Security which revealed that an independent, foreign intelligence firm had been hired to spy on Pennsylvanians.

In these memos, next to threat assessments from Middle Eastern terror groups were assessments and updates related to peaceful political groups, including environmental, gay rights, anti-drilling, anti-war, and pro second amendment, activist groups, among others.

In the name of fighting the “war on terror”, we gave up some of our most basic liberties, only to find that normal Americans participating in their right to protest, under the 1st amendment, were being monitored as potential terrorist threats. Further, we see that the overwhelming majority of instances in which the Patriot Act was used were for normal investigations, not terrorism, and that our government was also using the Patriot Act to gather information on private citizens, illegally, through the F.B.I..

Looking at how they have misused the Patriot Act, do you really think the government won't abuse the privilege they are now asking us to give them? Do you really want the government to have the legal authority to abduct American citizens in secret and hold them indefinitely on the mere suspicion of terrorism?

Benjamin Franklin's warning about trading liberty for security has never rung more true than now. The Bill of Rights in our Constitution was designed to protect us; not from some foreign enemy, or threat of terrorism, but from what the Founders viewed as the greatest threat to individual liberty and freedom: our own government.

How quickly we have forgotten the lessons of the past, willingly laying down the very freedoms which have preserved our liberty and kept us safe from the threat of tyranny within. If we give in and let these rights be taken, history teaches us where that road leads.

Call you elected representatives in Washington and tell them not to support this unconstitutional provision to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, and let them know you support President Obama's promise to use his veto power if it crosses his desk with this amendment.

Corporatism: The new face of fascism

2011-11-14T11:30:00.000-08:00

On July 9th, 1868, America adopted the 14th amendment to our Constitution. It was designed to be part of American reconstruction after the civil war, overruling the Dred Scott case granting blacks status as full citizens, and creating the equal protection clause.

Nearly two decades later it would resurface in a case before the Supreme Court which would fundamentally redefine individual rights.

In Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, the railroad company argued that they were entitled to equal protection for the purposes of tax exemptions granted by the Federal government but denied by the State of California.

The Court never actually ruled on the 14th amendment but found in favor of the railroad based on the improper assessment of the property.

However, in the headnote of the Court's decision the court reporter, J.C. Bancroft Davis, former president of Newburgh and New York Railway, noted in reference to observations by Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite before arguments:

"The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does."

This editorial headnote would become the basis for further case law establishing the personhood of corporations despite the fact that the court never actually ruled on the constitutional issue regarding the 14th amendment.

This laid the foundations for corporations to hold the same rights as you and I, giving them 1st amendment rights, so companies like NIKE could claim the right to lie about running sweatshops to the public.

In the case of Dow Chemical v. The United States, it allowed the EPA to be sued for violating the 4th amendment rights of Dow Chemical when it took areal photos of their facilities to investigate violations of the Clean Air Act.

More importantly, it allows corporations to “buy” politicians by granting them the first amendment right to run political ads and donate to campaigns.

This is nothing more than an aggregation of power through wealth and political influence. It is the very essence of plutocracy and the tool by which American liberty is being subverted by economic terrorism. It is very plainly, oligarchical fascism.

It is how multi-billion dollar corporations like GE make billions in profits and pay no taxes.

It is how the banks and corporations who are responsible for our economic turmoil lobby politicians to give them trillions of dollars of our tax money while the average American still struggles to get by.

The argument against corporate personhood is the very essence of the Occupy Wall Street and the 99% movement. It is the fight which we must win to take back our basic rights as human beings and restore sanity to Washington.

Nowhere in our Constitution did it grant corporations these rights. Our current state of affairs is the result of a perverse interpretation of the 14th amendment and bad case law. It is a sacrilege that a law designed to set men free would inevitably enslave their descendants to corporate masters.

A private sector tyrant who rules through wealth and power gained by political influence is no more palatable than a public dictator who rules by direct force. Liberty and individual freedom belong to the individual, not to corporate entities.

Why I love the Westboro Baptist Church

2011-11-13T15:21:00.000-08:00

Saturday, the 12th of November, 2011 the Westboro Baptist Church picketed in State College, PA to protest the sexual abuse of children by Jerry Sandusky, carrying signs with vile and hateful slogans.

A group of students from Penn State University organized a counter-protest across the street with an aim to ignore and marginalize the Westboro protesters.

While most people stayed on the opposite side of the street I could not help but go over and engage them in some confrontational dialogue and mock them openly.

Some say this is exactly what they want, that they crave the attention, and we should just ignore them. I say give them all the attention they want. Keeping them in the spotlight is the best possible thing for those of us that oppose their hateful rhetoric and everything it stands for.

All us fair minded folk know that hatred and bigotry is alive and well in this country. In particular, there is a lot of deep seeded hate in this country toward the Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay, and Transgender community. Some of it is outspoken but much of it is far more subtle and masked in the guise of patronizing love and false humility.

While many Fundamentalists who oppose gay rights try to gloss over the uglier sections of the Bible and frame their arguments around loving the sinner and hating the sin, the Westboro folks are much more honest about what the Bible really says and far more open about the sentiment behind the bigotry toward gay people.

The effect they have on the debate is profound, but not in the sense that their hate speech is resonating with anyone; rather, it creates a caricature of fundamentalists that inevitably marginalizes them with the average person, pushing society away from ideas that would associate with such outright bigotry.

Yes, the things they say and do are offensive, and their actions are despicable, but they provide a perfect opportunity to highlight the hypocrisy of Christian fundamentalism and mock it.

Every time they are in the news they push people the other way and toward a more tolerant viewpoint.

As an atheist, I absolutely love the fact that they don't ignore all those really fun parts of scripture that most Christians like to pretend don't exist. When people read their signs it is my hope they pick up a Bible and investigate what it really says.

So, if someone tells you to just ignore these idiots, just ignore them instead and give our friends at the Westboro Baptist Church all the love and attention they crave.

You are not alone

2011-11-06T19:20:00.001-08:00

Growing up in the church as a pastor's kid I had my fill of religious indoctrination, and for many years it did it's intended purpose, keeping me hinged to a theistic belief system.

From a young age I was taught to believe in God and His Son Jesus so that I could get into heaven and avoid eternal damnation. I never doubted much of what I was taught growing up and even into my twenties I never thought of abandoning my faith in God.

As my childhood faded and I became a teenager, I got involved in many church activities and was active in my church youth group. I eventually volunteered as a short-term missionary and attended training with a non-denominational missions organization doing volunteer work in South Africa, Mexico, and here in the U.S.

After that period of my life, circumstances led me back home and I got a job and began living a more normal life attending local churches and volunteering in my free time.

I had ups and downs throughout my Christian life but overall there was no defining event that caused me to reject faith.

Deep into my twenties, questions that had been with me all along began to resurface and despite the teaching I had been given to resist doubt, I secretly began to deconstruct the faith I had once so passionately adhered to.

I began to read various books and started to ask questions I had been afraid to consider before.

One of the books I read fervently was the Bible itself. I had read it cover to cover many times and yet with my mind set on truth I began to see things that deeply bothered me.

One, for instance, being the hero of the Old Testament, Joshua, who led the Israelites into Canaan and fought the famed battle of Jericho(according to the Bible). He had always been touted as God's holy warrior and was referenced in many sermons I had heard as if he was a great spiritual leader, who's life contained lessons that we could learn from today.

What I began to see with objective eyes was a mass murdering genocidal warlord who killed men, women, and children for land and power.

This was just one of many things contained in the Bible that deeply disturbed me. Rape, murder, abuse of women and children, and the acceptance of slavery joined the ever growing list of things I could no longer justify.

I tried for a long time to reconcile my beliefs with the realities I was seeing in front of me, but it was too late to go back...my mind had finally turned on and it would not be satisfied any longer. The mental gymnastics that had been engrained into me to ignore atrocities and blatant contradictions had been overpowered by simple logic and reason.

More and more I began to compare history and science to all that I had been taught to believe and slowly, but surely, I came to the conclusion that Bible was not only wrong on many accounts, but the things it condoned were contrary to the moral code which I was taught as a child in the church.

My rejection of faith was not by any means an immediate response to this information. In fact, I began to say things that I hear often from other Christians; including the most popular catch phrase these days: “I'm not religious. I just believe in God.”

After a while though I began to see the fallacy of believing in a deity at all and started to consider the possibility of no God.

For a very long time I hid these doubts and even put on a front that I still believed.

When I finally had the courage to break free of my faith I was still afraid to say the “A” word; I used the other “a” word for a long time calling myself an agnostic. This was because I knew the stigma that coming out as an Atheist would cause, especially with such a deeply religious family.

One day, I finally decided that enough was enough, and I grew tired of hiding my true beliefs out of fear.

It has cost me friends and family members, but it has given me so much more in that I finally feel free in my mind and the guilt and superstition of all those years has been lifted.

This entire journey has instilled in me a deep compassion for those still trapped in religious indoctrination and an empathy for the things it does to the mind.

I can't tell you the number of nights that I spent on my knees with a Bible fervently seeking god and the truth. I honestly believed that my words were being heard somehow and often tried to interpret what I now know were simply internal emotions, as signs from God or His impression on my heart.

At times it seems to some Christian friends that my criticism of religion is disrespectful and crude, but it was often those types of commentary that made me think and planted seeds of thought in my mind that helped me eventually break free of the chains of superstition.

If you are out there reading this and have stopped believing in God but are still in that Atheist closet I just want you to know there are many others who have been down the same road. There are many of us out here who have come to the same conclusion you have and we know how hard it can be to take that final step and admit it publicly.

Just remember, you are not alone.

Bottoms Up

2011-11-01T17:24:00.000-07:00

In the theatre of the absurd that is modern prohibition, there is one absurdity that steals the show: the illegality of marijuana.

Our government spends millions upon millions of dollars arresting and imprisoning people for selling, possessing, and consuming a plant that any person can grow in their backyard.

As if banning mother nature wasn't bad enough, to add insult to injury, we send thousands of people to prison, ruin countless lives, and destroy families, while the government ignores study after study which show marijuana has numerous medicinal applications and health benefits.

In addition to providing benefits for cancer, HIV, and glaucoma patients, recent studies also show that cannibus may help prevent the onset of Alzheimer's. However, in spite of all the mounting empirical data, marijuana is still classified by the Federal government as a Schedule 1 drug with little or no health benefits.

Can the Federal government's stance on marijuana get any more ridiculous?

Well, get ready, because a recently released study by the Journal of Psychopharmacology has revealed that marijuana is far less harmful for you than a legal substance that may be sitting in your refrigerator.

In the study, the researchers found, “A direct comparison of alcohol and cannabis showed that alcohol was considered to be more than twice as harmful as cannabis to [individual] users, and five times more harmful as cannabis to others (society).… As there are few areas of harm that each drug can produce where cannabis scores more [dangerous to health] than alcohol, we suggest that even if there were no legal impediment to cannabis use, it would be unlikely to be more harmful than alcohol.”

In their conclusion they further stated, “The findings underline the need for a coherent, evidence-based drugs policy that enables individuals to make informed decisions about the consequences of their drug use.”

So, the next time you pull a beer from the fridge or go down to the bar with your friends, just remember that you could be doing something far less harmful to your body and society.

And to those of you who read accounts of individuals arrested for growing and distributing pot with self-righteous indignation, just remember to quantify some of that disdain for the local bar owners and beer distributors as well as all their patrons.

Now we could simply ignore this data and continue our hypocrisy as a society or we could just admit our folly and legalize marijuana, but then that would make sense, and if there is one thing I have learned about this war on drugs, it's that it makes anything but sense.

The Gloom in the Boom

2011-10-30T15:33:00.001-07:00

With the onset of an ever increasing gas “boom” in our region, the weight of the impacts are being considered by many of us with great concern over the future of our community as a whole.

Living a stones throw from Rt. 664, I have had first hand experience with the increased truck traffic and the safety hazards on our local roads.

The indelible effects of the gas drilling and related activity and its impacts on the local citizens must be honestly assessed. Unfortunately, to a great extent, one of the most impactful consequences is being ignored and has not been fully appreciated.

As many of you may have noticed, the price for renting any type of dwelling has skyrocketed over the last 2 years. The reason for this has been the influx of workers hired by the firms related to natural gas drilling. The jobs pay well for that sector of the employed, and since many of them have come from outside the area they immediately put a strain on the rental market, increasing demand and monthly rent fees.

This is not a situation unique to Clinton County. It has been observed in communities throughout the country where gas drilling has occurred.

For those that are employed otherwise, the wages they receive have not drastically changed, and many I have had conversations with have either had their rent raised or were “forced out” so that a worker employed by a natural gas related company could move in at a higher rate.

A scenerio is building where we may see "working homeless" families and individuals who have jobs but can no longer afford housing.

With the current state of the overall economy and the increasing cost of basic needs like energy and food, this added burden to the poor and lower middle class in Clinton County is more than unwelcome; it is in so many cases, the straw breaking the proverbial camel's back.

The recent news that one of the largest employers in our region, First Quality, will be laying off some of its employees only serves to highlight the encompassing effect that higher living costs will have on those who find themselves out of a job or dispossessed by a struggling economy.

This is not to say that the drilling activity has not improved the lives of some. Some local businesses have capitalized on new clientele, flush with cash. There are also the handful of local individuals who have been hired to work in the gas industry and have profited from it. However, it is undeniable to any person with even moderate observation skills that a large portion of the work force for the gas industry is imported from elsewhere.

It is an uncomfortable point to interject, when the source of prosperity for some is placing an unrequited burden upon others in the community, but it is necessary to honestly broach the topic before the disparity widens and further polarizes the citizenry.

Our state Constitution says that the Commonwealth “shall conserve and maintain” our public natural resources “for the benefit of all the people.” In a county where most of the drilling is occurring on public land and so many are forced to live with the impacts on infrastructure, housing costs, and other numerous inconveniences without any individual return, it can be assuredly purported that the current situation is not benefiting all citizens and is, in fact, going a step further and causing actual harm to a large quantity of persons.

This argument is the basis for a severance tax or an impact fee on the gas industry. It is not right for some to profit at the expense of their neighbors quality of life. Indeed it is not only irresponsible to ignore the current situation, but collectively immoral for it to be tolerated by any of us.

Pointing fingers in the wrong direction

2011-10-22T19:53:00.000-07:00

I am absolutely sick and tired of the argument by conservative Republicans that half of this country pays no taxes. The middle class and the poor pay taxes every day and when you include sales taxes, government fees, taxes on utilities, and other forms of regressive taxation the actual tax rate that the bottom 50% of the population is paying is far more than the big fat zero touted by people like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

In 2007, two Boston University economists, Laurence J. Kotlikoff and David Rapson, calculated that even the poorest Americans are paying around 40% of their income to some form of taxation.

This divisive rhetoric does absolutely nothing to help fix our country's problems and targets families and the elderly as the source of our economic problems while ignoring those truly responsible.

I had an acquaintance tell me the other day how upset he was that he paid $20,000 in taxes while a teacher that made half his income paid nothing in taxes when he did her tax return for her.

I asked him why he was so upset with a teacher that makes half his income when General Electric made billions in profits in 2010 and paid absolutely no federal taxes.

This inanity coming from these so-called fiscal conservatives is mind boggling.

It drives me to anger when I see trillions spent on needless wars and bailouts for corporations and banks, but when we need someone to blame, grandma's social security check is the source of our problems.

What does it say about us as a nation when we turn against those in our society who are the most vulnerable while we give banksters and corporate fat cats a pass as they steal from us in plain sight?

I believe in limited government and I want fiscal responsibility, but it begins by a rational approach to our current situation and placing condemnation on those truly responsible for our current financial crisis.

The last time I checked it wasn't senior citizens that drove the derivative market and sold bad debt as mortgage backed securities.

It wasn't the poor family up the street that crashed the stock market by naked short selling.

It wasn't the middle class who got trillions of dollars of their own tax money in bailouts.

Redirect your anger at those who actually deserve it, and stop attacking your fellow Americans.

Dear Jesus: A break-up letter

2011-10-18T04:21:00.000-07:00

Dear Jesus,

Its been a while since you and I had a talk. The conversations were always a bit one sided so I thought this time I would write you a letter and let you know how things have been.

As you have probably heard by now, I've become an Atheist.

It all started about seven years ago when I began to have doubts about our relationship. I just wasn't convinced that any of what I was taught to believe was true anymore.

For a long time, I tried holding onto my faith but as I grew hungry for more and more knowledge I just kept finding less and less reasons to believe in you.

One thing that I've been meaning to ask you is why you let my Grandmother die of cancer. She loved you, and no matter how much she prayed you just sat by and let her body destroy itself. She died alone in her chair with a Bible clinging to her hope in you, but you never helped her.

All those miracles in the Bible and all the Christian teachings about the power of God and you let one of your most faithful servants die of a disease you have the power to cure.

I suppose you were testing her faith like Job. I would like to think she is reaping her reward in heaven, but I know better now.

As if that wasn't enough a few years later you let my wife's mother die of cancer right when she was about to retire and enjoy the twilight of her life. She was a kind and loving person yet I guess none of that mattered as your will saw fit for her to suffer and die while she suffocated to death as the cancerous fluid filled her lungs.

She believed in you, too, but apparently not enough to let her stick around and enjoy her grandkids.

Not long after that ,you “called home” my other grandmother by granting her the same fate as your other beloved daughters and let the cancer have her as well. A beautiful life ended by your “intelligent design” ...or was it just indifference?

Now I could understand if you were busy solving world hunger or trying to stop all the wars, but I turned on the T.V. to see that you would rather help someone win American Idol. I hear you even helped my neighbor find her keys.

I know its not my place to question you; well, at least that's how I was raised, but it seems as though this whole game of life is rigged. If any of the people I had lost somehow survived after the doctors treated them you would have gotten the credit. Somehow, though, you still got the credit for letting them die. After all, its your plan...who are we to question?

It seems as though you get your credit no matter the turnout. Its all just a part of a plan I can't begin to understand.

You might think I am bitter about all this, but really I'm just fine. You see I finally saw through your game and stopped playing by your rules.

I know you say you died for my sins and all, but I never asked you to do that. I never even asked to be born into sin, for that matter. I was just a child when your teachings were given to me by my parents telling me that I was basically a worthless sinner in need of your forgiveness.

To be perfectly, honest I was a bit confused about this whole situation. I mean I was just a kid after all, and I couldn't imagine what I could have done to make people torture and crucify you, but I was told that you were up there on that cross because of me.

Along the way, as I was growing up I did have questions and doubts but thanks to that wonderful childhood indoctrination I plowed right them with faith, because I wouldn't want you to be disappointed in me like you were in that guy named Thomas.

I'm sure this letter would be easier if I could just go back to those days and ignore all the knowledge I've gained and replace my doubts and questions with faith, but while your teachings do have some great lessons, a lot of things in that book of yours just don't add up.

Don't worry. I'm not mad. I realize that you were just a man, like me who had some ideas and spoke his mind. You really do seem like a nice person and I appreciate the thought, but I won't be needing your forgiveness anymore.

I have kids of my own now. I am teaching them that they are beautiful just the way they are. They will have no guilt complexes over their sinful nature. They will not be told they are innately evil. They will grow up without being told not to ask questions. I will tell them to challenge everything and explore every possibility.

I hope this letter makes it clear that even though we had some great times I just don't think you and I are working out.

I wish you the best of luck helping someone's favorite football team win the super bowl this year.

Sincerely,

Tim

Political ramblings of a heathen

2011-10-16T10:15:00.000-07:00

While out and about the other day I was listening to NPR and they were interviewing people, asking their opinions on the Republican candidates for president. One of the men being interviewed said that he could not vote for Mitt Romney because he didn't follow the Nicene Creed. A woman that followed him said that she wants a Christian in office. Both seemed to express that a person of faith was a prerequisite to earning their votes.

I wish I could say this attitude suprised me, but it is all too common and as I listened to this painful drivel a few thoughts struck me.

This has hit me at a moment when I have been weighing the societal harm of religion and its effects on our political subculture. This is America, after all, where being an atheist is worse than being a member of any other minority and people throw about the term “Christian nation” and think that the world is coming to an end because the ten commandments were removed from a courthouse.

To really examine the harm that religious and faith based thinking does to our body politic we need to reveal the basic thought process in operation.

Faith is, in essence, the acceptance of information presented by other human beings as if it were the instruction of a higher power. No evidence is required to believe by faith and in turn no facts can dissuade the devoted and faithful.

This way of viewing reality is instilled in most children at a young age and affects how many people fundamentally view everything around them. When questions arise, the mind has been prepared to reject doubt and accept faith without proof as a symbol of piety and righteousness.

This manner of processing information does not naturally divorce itself from the mind in other areas. It makes the mind pliable to accept any number of ideas so long as the messenger can convince the other person that his message is not his own, but the will of a higher power.

In a society like ours with such a high density of religious individuals, it leads one to wonder how this might play into how people process news and information and make voting decisions.

Consciously or not if your modus operandi for the most basic metaphysical thought processes is the willingness to accept information without proof as long as you can be convinced with sophistry that the source is divinely inspired, then you can be led to believe any number of things based on nuances and emotionally inspired gut reactions.

It is here where we begin to see the psychological malleability that is engrained in our culture through religion. Simply replace a deity with the mainstream media and religious leaders with talking heads and the correlating impact becomes much clearer.

Reason disintegrates in cloud of rhetoric while objective reality passes by right in plain sight and is ignored for a dogmatic principle created for the enslaved mind by those with the power of contrived authority and respect.

What astounds me is that we often see glimmers of reason within religious members of society where they artificially divorce faith in some aspects of their life, and compartmentalize it, clinging to a cognitive dissonance which allows the dichotomy to exist.

This is also, in my opinion why there is so much hypocrisy in American society. We have a love/hate relationship with reason, and because of this, our minds cannot break free to their full potential having been wrapped up tight in an underlying thought process that has been implanted with all kinds of traps and mechanisms to prevent it unraveling.

Underpinning all of this is one very basic and primal motive: fear. Fear of hell, fear of death and so on. It is the fallback position to every religion to ensure the mind is fully ensnared.

This enslavement of the mind is almost beautiful in its design. It is a self perpetuating, man made prison where the victim holds the key to their freedom but chooses to remain enslaved of their own accord.

The true power behind this illusion is not in its ability to keep people locked into circular thinking, but that it convinces the slave that he or she is free while the mind is still shackled.

Because of this, anything that is considered a threat to this illusion is an enemy of that perceived freedom and is viewed as something which needs to be opposed, many times in a violent fashion.

Now we see why atheists are so hated in a society ruled by a theist majority, and how the design of this system prevents the most free in thought from ever attaining political power.

With a population readied to believe in things not backed by reason or evidence, the political field is whatever those who control the methods of propaganda wish it to be.

This is the very disturbing consequence of a pervasive thought pattern prevalent in our culture. It is what will lead us to our doom and why there are so many "undecided" voters. Everything is reduced to sound bytes and rhetoric which is what most people use to make their final decision at the ballot box.

This shows us that our efforts are not best used in fighting political battles at this point, but instead on changing minds and helping others use the key to their prisons.

Some will call this a religious effort, but in the end, all who enter through the door of reason will see the difference, and not by convincing arguments, but by the truth of reality itself using their own mind.

Let's just hope we wake up enough people before its too late to recover.

Just Say NO!

2011-10-14T03:46:00.001-07:00

Reading the news lately, I have noticed quite a few stories about drug related arrests and the heroin “epidemic” that is plaguing our community and many others around the country. After 40 years and well over a trillion dollars you might think that America would have curbed its drug problem; but its worse now than it ever has been and its not getting any better.

At some point we have to stop and ask the question that begs an answer: Is our current drug policy working?

Well, the immediate answer to that question should be an obvious and resounding, NO.

For these last 40 years we have focused on enforcement of prohibition trying vainly to stem the tide of drugs entering this country. We have waged brushfire wars in various Central and South American countries, divested billions in foreign aid, and there remains no end in sight to this country's drug “problem”.

As a libertarian, I believe in principle that a person's body is their own to do with as they please and no one should have the right to tell them what they can and cannot do as long as they are not harming anyone else. However, even if you disagree with personal freedom to do drugs, not one proponent of drug prohibition can make a valid argument that their policies are succeeding or even helping the majority of those with drug problems.

Just like their forebears, the modern temperance movement strides ever onward in its altruistic crusade to control the behavior of others with disastrous consequences. Our inner cities are wastelands, drug related crime is a persistent problem in all population centers, and Mexico has become a war zone ruled by the drug cartels with daily violence that often pours over the border.

Do not take my derisive tone toward our self aggrandizing saviors, who favor prohibition, as a mockery of the victims of drug abuse. For if there is one group of people that are not being aided by our current war on drugs, it is most certainly the addict.

Treating non-violent drug offenders as criminals not only drains our public resources but it turns what should be a medical issue into a criminal escapade. In Pennsylvania, 39% of all inmates are there for non-violent offenses, which are mostly drug related. In a press release earlier this year, PA Auditor General Jack Wagner stated that the state could save around $350 million if we released all non-violent offenders.

That is $350 million dollars that could be spent on helping addicts recover, rather than simply tossing them in jail.

But there is a better answer to this problem. One that seems unpalatable at first glance, but it is an idea that is gaining more and more traction. And some of those that are coming forward in this cause may surprise you.

Earlier this year, a group of world leaders met to discuss the worldwide war on drugs. Among their ranks were former UN secretary general Kofi Annan, former U.S. secretary of state George Shultz, former U.S. Fed chairman Paul Volcker, and dignitaries from many Central and South American countries. Their conclusion was that the world wide war on drugs is failing while creating violence around the world, and that nations should move forward to begin legalizing and regulating drugs as an alternative.

This is nothing new to veterans of the drug war and law enforcement. An organization named Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, founded in 2002, has seen its ranks swell in recent years with police officers, judges, and D.A.'s who have seen the dark side of this unending war and seek real answers to our problems.

Its not just law enforcement getting into the fight, either. Community leaders, pastors, and medical health professionals are joining the growing chorus of voices to call for an end to the war on drugs.

These people realize what many of us have come to see: Our communities are not safer, prohibition makes it easier for kids to get illegal drugs, and sending a person to jail for nothing more than getting high is not productive for society.

If you care about your community and you want common sense solutions that help people and get addicts the medical care they need; if you want to create a taxable industry that will create jobs and get the gangs off our streets; then stand with the rest of us who have woken up to the failures of modern prohibition, and just say no to the war on drugs.

Private property rights under assault in America

2011-10-04T18:08:00.000-07:00

I'd like to tell you a story about a man named Russ Caswell, who's family has owned and operated a motel in Tewksbury, Massachusetts for over 30 years.

After two generation of being family owned and operated this local business is threatened with closing its doors forever.

Now you might think that its because of hard times or economic troubles, but you would be wrong. You might also assume that he refused to pay his property taxes, and you would still be wrong. Mr. and Mrs. Caswell own their property free and clear.

The reason that this privately owned business might be shut down for good is because the local police, in conjunction with federal authorities, want to seize this family's business and sell it for a profit which will be divided between federal and local authorities under a policy called equitable sharing set forth by federal civil forfeiture laws.

Now here is where most of you would assume that the owners broke some law or violated some local ordinance, and you would again be wrong.

So, why does the government want this man's property, valued at around 1 million dollars? Well, because approximately 0.0005% of the people who have rented rooms from Mr. Caswell over the last 20 years have been arrested for committing crimes on his property.

You might then assume that he was conspiring with criminals or looking the other way, and once again you would be wrong. Mr. Caswell has had a history of working with authorities to stop criminal activity occurring on his property.

How then could any of this be possible, you ask?

In the United States Code and in most states, exist civil forfeiture laws which allow authorities to seize property which may be associated with criminal activity. No conviction is required and no laws must be broken by the owner of the property. Under a preponderance of evidence, which is the lowest burden of proof accepted by a court, any privately owned property can be seized and sold off to pad the budgets of local and federal law enforcement agencies.

Since the inception of this financial incentive in 1986 the federal forfeiture fund has grown to over 1.6 billion dollars in 2010.

Here in the Keystone State, authorities have raked in an average of 5.9 million dollars a year, between 2000 and 2008, from seizures in conjunction with federal authorities using the same civil forfeiture laws that are being used to rob Mr. Caswell of his business and his retirement.

In Pennsylvania, our law mirrors federal law and what is happening to Mr. Caswell could easily happen to any business owner reading this.

What makes matters worse is that the money gained from selling seized property, in Pennsylvania, is held in a fund that is not open to public scrutiny and is used at the discretion of local district attorneys with minimal oversight.

Many people are not even aware these laws exist and only discover them when they are staring down the barrel of a gun while police force them out of their homes and businesses.

Take the time to educate yourself on civil forfeiture laws by visiting http://www.ij.org and call your elected representatives to let them know you want these tyrannical laws taken off the books.

Homophobia

2011-10-03T19:52:00.000-07:00

In response to my City Council’s denial of my request to enact anti-discrimination policies for members of the LBGT community, I read the following poem during public comment this evening at the regular meeting…

I am the girl kicked out of her home because I confided in my mother that I am a lesbian.

I am the prostitute working the streets because nobody will hire a transsexual woman.

I am the sister who holds her gay brother tight through the painful, tear-filled nights.

We are the parents who buried our daughter long before her time.

I am the man who died alone in the hospital because they would not let my partner of twenty-seven years into the room.

I am the foster child who wakes up with nightmares of being taken away from the two fathers who are the only loving family I have ever had. I wish they could adopt me.

I am one of the lucky ones, I guess. I survived the attack that left me in a coma for three weeks, and in another year I will probably be able to walk again.

I am not one of the lucky ones. I killed myself just weeks before graduating high school. It was simply too much to bear.

We are the couple who had the realtor hang up on us when she found out we wanted to rent a one-bedroom for two men.

I am the person who never knows which bathroom I should use if I want to avoid getting the management called on me.

I am the mother who is not allowed to even visit the children I bore, nursed, and raised. The court says I am an unfit mother because I now live with another woman.

I am the domestic-violence survivor who found the support system grow suddenly cold and distant when they found out my abusive partner is also a woman.

I am the domestic-violence survivor who has no support system to turn to because I am male.

I am the father who has never hugged his son because I grew up afraid to show affection to other men.

I am the home-economics teacher who always wanted to teach gym until someone told me that only lesbians do that.

I am the man who died when the paramedics stopped treating me as soon as they realized I was transsexual.

I am the person who feels guilty because I think I could be a much better person if I didn't have to always deal with society hating me.

I am the man who stopped attending church, not because I don't believe, but because they closed their doors to my kind.

I am the person who has to hide what this world needs most, love.

Author - Unknown

Liberty and Justice for Some

2011-09-19T18:11:00.001-07:00

Despite the mostly positive response I received from members of Lock Haven City Council the last time I presented the idea of enacting a non-discrimination ordinance as well as policy changes for city employees to protect members of the Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay and Transgender community with the same protections afforded to others based on religion, race, and gender; Monday night, at the regular public meeting, the Mayor told me in no uncertain terms that they did not wish to move forward on the matter. I was told that I was welcome to go to the state and lobby them for the changes if I desired.

This is an appalling and very callous approach to an issue that deals with basic human rights. Under current Pennsylvania law gay marriage remains illegal and in 70% of Pennsylvania it is still legal for a person to be fired from their job, denied public accommodation, or evicted from their apartment simply because they are homosexual.

Perhaps some members of council or even the Mayor himself are content with the current state of affairs and passing the blame on to Harrisburg, but this is a matter which should concern all of us, even those who are not members of the Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay and Transgender community, when others are being treated with such blatant discrimination and denied basic human rights. After all, Harrisburg simply represents all of us in a collective sense and in this we are all responsible for making the needed changes to move Pennsylvania forward in the right direction.

This is why communities across the state are not waiting for Harrisburg to take action and have begun to pass policies that will help end discrimination against the Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay and Transgender community in their towns and cities.

The most recent of these in our region was State College joining the over 20 other townships, boroughs, and cities across Pennsylvania that have taken a progressive role in ensuring that all citizens of our great state receive the protections they are entitled to by our Constitution.

I encourage the Mayor and members of Council to reconsider their decision to refrain from action and I call upon all members of our community to speak out in favor of ensuring that all of our neighbors and fellow citizens are able to enjoy the same rights we do and pursue happiness without fear of discrimination.

Going blind

2011-09-11T21:38:00.000-07:00

I was watching Invictus starring Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela last night and with all the attention on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 it got me thinking of how we reacted to a singular event compared to a people repressed and abused for decades under Apartheid who could find the strength to act in peace and forgiveness rather than violence and aggression.

Gandhi once said that an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. What he meant in those words is that retribution and revenge only continue the cycle of violence that creates war and human suffering.

Should we have responded to the attacks on 9/11? Of course. But was that response tempered with an understanding, respect,and compassion for others not involved who might be affected? I do not believe it was.

Even to this day there is a large sentiment that we need to keep attacking these “enemies” and we continue fighting wars that never end that seem to be leading us into even more conflicts. This is why Gandhi spoke those words to his fellow Indians and why Nelson Mandela discouraged violence and retribution on white South Africans even after the abuses and violence that had been perpetrated on their fellow countrymen.

When someone hurts us and murders those we love our pain can be so great that we cannot bear it and the resulting anger can often lead us to desires of revenge. And where pain and anger fail to motivate those of us not directly affected fear takes hold and compels us to take action.

It is a hard thing to do when we feel such a loss as occurred on September 11th, 2001 to turn away the desire to react out of emotion and grief. The evil that caused it was real and the events certainly caused fear in all of us, but our reaction and the last 10 years of subsequent action have shown our failure to be of better quality than those who attacked us.

Our bombs and our soldiers have killed far more innocents and civilians than the planes that hit the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Yet, somehow we piously justify those deaths because our cause is righteous. “It's war,” we say. Why is it that most Americans cannot see this great hypocrisy?

So, as I watched the story of a man who was abused and imprisoned by a racist regime who came back to bring his people together in peace when many demanded justice for the wrongs committed against them; I could not help but think at how our nation is left wanting of great men such as this who know the healing power of compassion and forgiveness and the very terrible outcome of revenge and hate.

Do not misunderstand me in this. It is not for the sake of evil men that we seek peace but it is for the purpose of robbing them of their tools of fear and misunderstanding created by strife and conflict that good men and women temper their actions and refrain from bloodshed when it is not a required course of action. Revenge for the sake of revenge is a conceited and self destructive course of action. War is on occasion a necessary evil but it should always be enacted with a reluctant heart never with a fervent hatred and desire for revenge lest one day we all go blind.

Remembering 9/11

2011-09-10T13:41:00.001-07:00

When will we hold a memorial service to honor our dead freedoms that have been laid to rest by 10 years of fear mongering rhetoric and war? At some point in time will we mourn the loss of liberty to the encroaching police state or ponder on our continuing military adventurism?

Who will light a candle for our fading constitutional republic this 9/11 as our nation spirals into crisis due to debt created from “keeping America safe”? Who will mourn the lost fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters who have had their lives snuffed out while military contractors make record profits and the bodies continue to pile higher?

Do not just remember the towers and the Pentagon or that field in rural Pennsylvania. Remember Homeland Security. Remember the TSA. Remember the Patriot Act. Remember Abu Ghraib. Remember every life in every country that has been impacted by that day and the actions since.

And as we remember that horrible morning 10 years ago remember what it has truly cost us and never forget that those who trade liberty for security deserve neither and often lose both.

The Meaning Of Life To Me

2011-09-06T23:48:00.001-07:00

I'm feeling pensive tonight so I took a little something personal I wrote and decided to post it here on my blog:

Some live all their lives trying to escape the reality around them for a belief in something greater than this temporary existence. Others indulge their senses to numb the emptiness and fear of the unknown. Everyone tries to fill the invisible void of purpose with a construct meant to comfort their ego.

To this I simply ask, "why?"

Why does there need to be something more than this life? Why does there need to be a god or a heaven? Why is this life not enough? True hope to me is not looking forward to what is unknown, but accepting this incarnation and finding the wonder in every second of every minute you have breath, not in a hedonistic and self absorbed ambivalence, but with the calm surety of peace and serenity. Inside of every moment is an opportunity to see this world in all its beauty and cherish those you love while they are still here.

My kids are upstairs laughing and playing as I sit here writing this and I can think of no eternal pleasure that could rival just this moment. The temporal is not my enemy...it is what gives meaning to life. The value of what we hold dear comes from its limitations. The eternal is cold and unfeeling, but something that goes away has unfathomable worth. The inevitability of loss is why we care so much and why death brings sorrow, but the sadness at the end of this journey is what gives every other moment an irreplaceable significance.

I know this may not make sense to some of you but that's ok...if what you believe makes this life better for you then who am I to take that from you; but as for me, if this is all there is that's perfectly fine by me.

Williamsport City Council Violates Rights of Citizen and My Response

2011-09-02T19:38:00.000-07:00

“The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered... deeply, ...finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.” -George Washington

The privilege of public office is a duty that bears with it the great responsibility to act judiciously in order to preserve the sacred fire that our first President spoke of in the quote above. The oath that all our officials take to protect and preserve our constitution is not just a collection of words recited into empty space, it is a verbal contract with the people of this nation. It is a mantle of trust that is taken up to perform and exercise the office with the principles of freedom and liberty at the forethought of every action.

When this trust is broken and the rights of the people are violated it is not merely a crime against that person but against every person who enjoys the liberties and freedoms our Constitution guarantees.

At the Williamsport City Council meeting on September 1st one of our most basic rights was thrown down and trampled by Council President J. Marlyne Whaleyan in an egregious violation of civil liberty.

A citizen of Williamsport had come with the support of a group of gun owners to speak out on an issue relating to the 2nd amendment. When this gentleman rose to speak he was berated by the Council President and with these parting words she threw his rights down at his feet and paraded an arrogance that astonished all of us.

She said the following:

“Right now I'm not going to listen to you. Because I know what it's about. I don't think it's appropriate. I'm not going to listen. If you don't like it. Sue me.”

And with that she called for an adjournment as every member of council and the mayor sat by in complicit silence.

Meanwhile, the young veteran of two tours in the Middle East was left standing with the rest of us speechless and stripped of the very rights he risked his life to preserve, robbed from him by a petty tyrant with a gavel.

Our freedoms are too precious to let slip to this kind of unfettered arrogance and unabashed malfeasance. Every person acting in an official capacity at that meeting should not only be ashamed, but take the time to reflect more deeply upon the oath they swore when they took office.

Obama is a what?!

2011-08-27T12:08:00.000-07:00

A common encounter I have had at Tea Parties and similar events has been with those who share a distaste for our current President and his policies. However, I have had with startling frequency a number of these discussions turn toward the subject of our President's religious beliefs purporting that he is a Muslim. I have brushed off enough of these interactions to the point that it has become a common occurrence in spite of the fact that Obama has stated many times that he is a Christian and has attended Christian churches in the past.

I have seen and heard similar insinuations made in casual conversation outside political events as well and it has stirred within me a desire to say something about this particular sentiment:

So what if the President of the United States is a Muslim? Do we not live in a nation where we have a protected right to freedom of religion? I could care less if he lays down a prayer rug in the West Wing and bows toward Mecca five times a day than if he takes a knee with his Bible next to the Resolute Desk.

We have brave men and woman who serve this country in our armed forces who are Muslim. We have business owners and tax paying citizens of this nation who are Muslim. Why does it matter to you what religion a person adheres to when our Constitution, which many of you claim to love and cherish, holds no bias against anyone of a specific faith?

Personally, I think that the fact our nation is going bankrupt and many people are struggling to get by and simply find a job is of more importance than what deity our Commander in Chief consults in prayer. Don't you?

The True Origins of Liberty

2011-08-25T20:30:00.000-07:00

The foundations of our nation are built upon principles that exemplify individual rights and liberty. It is often stated that we are founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and morality. Such a view is used to support public policy that favors a Christian world view and such terms as “Christian nation” are used to describe the United States...but is that an accurate view of our past?

Well, lets take a look at some of the facts. If Christianity and the Bible are the basis for our rights and our government we should see some evidence of a free society in the Bible. The fact remains that throughout the entire text of the Old and New Testaments there is no evidence of a philosophy that would bring about a political creation as put forth in our Constitution(which conveniently enough has no mention of any deity or specific religion). The god of the Old Testament was rather authoritarian, to put it mildly, and Jesus was a non-interventionist. So if we are a “Christian nation” where is the correlation between scripture and reality? I see none.

The ten commandments from the book of Exodus are said to be the basis for our rule of law. However, they are moral precepts generally accepted by all societies. To claim that universal moral precepts are somehow definitively Christian and not attributable to a general sense of morality common to all cultures is a very narrow view of the world.

Looking at some other facts on hand we will find that America is not the first free society to have existed. The Greeks and the Romans had democratic societies centuries before the Founding Fathers signed our Declaration of Independence. The preferred religion of those days was polytheism, yet guided by great philosophers a classical age of reason brought forth the original ideas for democracy and freedom and laid the groundwork for our republic that would follow hundreds of years later.

From that time forward for many centuries Christianity grew and dominated Europe during a period aptly named The Dark Ages. The evidences of Christian faith were well manifest during this time which was dominated by bloodthirsty Monarchs, corrupt Popes, and the enslavement of mankind under serfdom. These monarchies were most certainly “Christian nations” blessed by the Church.

So, at this point in history the only free societies that had ever existed were in nations with pagan religions while under Christianity we saw only tyranny and oppression. But the foundations of the Church would be shaken by a period of enlightenment. During this time there was a rebirth of the Greek ideas based on science and reason which exploded into revolution.

The great thinkers of Europe during this time began to challenge the religious establishments and governments of their day. The ideas of the ancient Greek philosophers were reborn and freedom of thought brought forth new and exciting ideas of the rights of men. During this time many were predominantly of a Christian persuasion, but many were also Deists and some could even argue there were a few closet atheists in the bunch. However, we must acknowledge that the majority of the people during this period were Christian men and into this world America was born.

With this established we may now look at the whole of history and put into context whether we can be described as a “Christian nation” or simply as a free nation comprised of a majority of Christians. The evidence shows that free societies before us did exist without the influence of Judeo-Christian beliefs. We also see that the common thread in the struggle for the freedom of man has not been religious faith but reason. Men like Thomas Jefferson who wrote our Declaration of Independence gave service to this above even faith itself. He even encourages others to “question with boldness the very existence of God” admitting his belief that if there was a god he would respect the “homage” to reason over blind faith.

The purpose of this exercise is not to demean those that hold religious faith, but to place in context the proper place of religion in the fight for human liberty. When looked upon objectively, it is my conclusion that man's ability reason and think are the source of our freedoms and liberties. Religion and faith have benefited from this but they are not responsible for it. The common threads that have led us to where we are have crossed the lines of culture and religious belief and arisen out of a universal desire within all of us to be free.

So, whether you are Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Pagan, Agnostic, Atheist, or one of any other variety of beliefs, take pride in your rights and liberty as a product of our collective journey to be free and express that freedom in your own unique way.

Principles of a free society

2011-08-18T20:07:00.000-07:00

As we all make our way along this journey we call life our paths intersect along lines that cross both mind and heart. One thing we all begin to understand about life from an early age is that it is anything but simple and at times it can get complicated, but underneath all the exterior qualities of our existence lies the secret part of our mind where we truly reside. In that place, we are all equal. There is no race, no gender, no sexual identity; just the innate desires and passions that drive us to seek happiness in this life and others we can enjoy it with.

This secret place within all of us is what defines our humanity; it is the core of every person born on this earth. Unfortunately, outside of this place in all of us is the reality of a diverse world where outward appearances and cultural differences divide the interest of our hearts from the common desire within every mind to fulfill the basic needs of our human condition.

It is this place where the ideas were born for the most basic of our human rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. These rights that we cherish are nothing more than the most simplistic and beautiful part of the common thread of our humanity.

From the context of this perspective we do not see the need to deny others their path to achieve the fulfillment of these basic desires. The desire to make everyone like us fades away in the realization that our happiness is unique to our own lives. It becomes very easy to look upon the differences of our outward expressions as nothing more than the secret desires of our own mind manifest in another.

This is to me is the singular and most vital foundational principle of a successful and sustainable free society.

Beautiful Things

2011-08-17T21:09:00.000-07:00

The sound of footsteps coming down the stairs when I come home.

The laughter that fills the whole house.

The demands of two little girls for a hug and kiss before I leave the house...yes, every time.

The look of wonder as two little sets of eyes take in every new experience.

The random hug when I've had a really bad day followed by the words, “I love you, Daddy.”

The attitude I get and sometimes have to correct.

The mispronounced words.

The bumps and bruises.

The sadness I feel as each day more of the innocence fades away.

The pride I feel when I see their smiles brighten someone else's day.

These simple things.

The frustrating days.

The sleepless nights.

The moments of pure love and happiness because I am gifted with two wonderful little human beings.

These are the beautiful things in my life.

Indecision 2012 - Corn Polled Edition - Ron Paul & the Top Tier - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 08/15/11 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

2011-08-16T08:11:00.000-07:00

Indecision 2012 - Corn Polled Edition - Ron Paul & the Top Tier - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 08/15/11 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

The Cost of War

2011-08-14T08:36:00.000-07:00

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” -James Madison

Recently, Brown University released a study that reveals the economic, social, political, and human costs of our 10 years of war in the Middle East.

The military casualties include 6,051 American servicemen and women who lost their lives, 2,300 private contractors , 1,192 Allied forces , 3,250 Pakistani Security forces, and 18,678 Afghan and Iraqi security forces.

Additionally, the study made the following finding related to military casualties:

-Over 550,000 disability claims have been registered with the VA as of fall 2010

-Nearly 70,000 allied troops have been wounded

-A RAND study screening of returning troops found 26 percent likely had some kind of mental health condition.

-Toxic dust exposures in theater have been associated with high rates of respiratory, neurological, and cardiovascular disease in returning troops

-The middle class is somewhat overrepresented, the poor and the very wealthy underrepresented among the casualties

The civilian casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq, according to the study amount to an estimated figure of at least 137,000 but the number is believed to be higher.

The economic costs of the wars are estimated by the study at 3.2 – 4 trillion dollars. This includes the costs related to Veteran's care, interest payments, Homeland Security, and war related aid.

Social and political costs were also assessed by the study relating to loss of civil liberty, news coverage,growth of corporate power and profiteering, and environmental costs.

All of this information can be found by visiting http://www.costsofwar.org.

I think it is important to reflect upon this information and ask ourselves if it was worth the price we paid and if we can afford any more of these types of wars. As rhetoric dials up against Iran and we continue our involvement in Libya it would be wise of us to muse on the reality and brutality of maintaining our current foreign policy.

A note from the heart...

2011-08-12T22:45:00.000-07:00

Speaking out publicly on controversial issues often brings with it the negative attention from those who oppose your ideas. Since I have become vocal on gay rights I have seen and heard some things that disturb and sometimes infuriate my conscience ranging from outright hate speech to tepid opposition and general indifference.

As I speak out I aim not only to reform policy and law but to hopefully change minds. Many of you reading this may disagree with my position on this issue and it may even offend you. I ask you to read this short post with an open mind.

It is a disservice to everyone to ignore the reality of our opinions and the impact even indifference can have on the lives of others. The shame, depression, and the secret pain that people no emotionally different than you or I go through for simply being who they were born to be should move us all to empathy and compassion, but instead it is often met with a cold shoulder and heartless moral condemnation.

What astounds me more than anything is when I hear someone say that they love gay people but hate the sin...to you that may sound great coming out of your mouth and you may feel all warm and cuddly inside, but the person to whom the statement is directed has just been told that an integral part of who they are as a human being is worthy of hatred. That is the reality of your words and their impact.

For those of us who have found love and cherish our spouse, imagine going through the joy of finding that special person and feeling everything that you experienced together. Picture in your mind all the happiness that person brings you and then imagine someone telling you that you are an abomination and denying you the right to marry that person.

Gay people love like everyone else and just like any straight person want to find someone to share their life with. Thinking for one moment of what it might be like to feel what I feel for my wife and have someone belittle and condemn that love makes me realize the incredible hurt and pain that we as a society have heaped upon gay individuals not to mention the violence and discrimination that results from the societal stigma.

I am not only speaking as a Libertarian and civil rights advocate but as someone who was raised with the notion that homosexuality was a sin. I like many out there condemned it and even at one time made the same statements that I hear coming from others. What changed my mind was a heart to heart talk with a Christian gay man who with tears in his eyes looked at me and told me how my words made him feel and shared his experience living with the pain of being condemned by others for simply being himself.

So, for a moment think on not only the reality and human impact of your stance on gay rights but try just once to walk a mile in their shoes and ask yourself if, maybe, just maybe, you may be wrong and what the human cost of that error has been and might be.

The pension crisis and the coming financial storm

2011-07-26T14:39:00.000-07:00

If a member of the private sector who owns a business wishes to remain in business they must succeed at running a profitable venture. Without good accounting and a good profit margin they would be forced to shut down operations and in some cases file for bankruptcy. In the real world failure is very real consequence of mismanagement and non-profitability. If your product or service is needed by others another person will fill the need as the market demands.

In the private sector good business principles will determine your success or failure.

In the public sector things do not operate based on these principles. When poor accounting and bad management leads to shortfalls and deficits they do not close up shop or go bankrupt...they simply raise taxes. There are no profit/loss statements; no measure of value in production; there is only the quality of service that the public receives in comparison to a burden of taxation acceptable to the general population.

This is where public sector unions come into play. Under contract the state is bound to abide by the employee salaries and benefits that are reached through arbitration. Collectively, we are all bound to these agreements to pay the agreed benefits and salaries our elected officials sign off on.

The problem arises when our public funds are mismanaged and a shortfall appears on the horizon. Because we are bound by the union contracts, costs cannot be cut and rather than reduce costs where they would be most effective by adjusting salaries and benefits we are forced to accept more painful cuts in programs and valuable educational assets.

In Pennsylvania, we are quickly approaching a deficit in our teachers pension program that will increase costs astronomically. Due to underfunding and unsustainable benefits the Public School Employees' Retirement System will require a massive increase in employer contributions over the next 3-5 years.

Projections from the Dept. of Education show that without large amounts of alternative funding a substantial increase in local taxes will be required to offset the deferred maintenance. To put this in perspective, the previous years employer contribution rate of 4.78% has been increased to 8.65% and the projected rate increase is 32.09% by 2014.

The residents of my own local school district have endured three years of tax increases totaling an average of 4.31%; if measures are not taken to cut rather than defer costs then we will be facing an even greater series of tax increases that will dwarf what we have seen across the state.

The stubbornness of facts

2011-07-26T10:16:00.000-07:00

You may find the original letter to the editor posted here: Criticism of teachers unfounded, uncalled for

My response:

Mr. Morris, where you see contempt I see concern. The realities of our school district provide ample reason to draw the ire of the public. It is definitely not unfounded and certainly not uncalled for.

Despite the financial aspects of the argument we find ourselves in a school district that ranks 407th out of 498 in the state; according to the PA Dept. of Education Central Mountain has failed to meet Adequate Yearly Progress and is among one of this state's worst performing schools. Bucktail is on the verge of becoming a failing school, and according to the Report Card issued by the PA Dept. Of Education, we have 28 teachers that are below qualification level teaching at Central Mountain.

While you may think it unfair to compare to Bellefonte, I doubt that one could say it is unfair to compare us to the 406 school districts that rank better than KCSD throughout the state as well as every other school district in the region. To use poverty as an excuse is shameless. I grew up in poverty and it was never a reason to lower the expectations of my parents or my teachers. There is no poverty index for employment qualification and thrusting children out into the world with an expectation of preference due to their social status is doing them a great disservice. Success demands excellence, not excuses.

As to the quality of education in our elementary schools I will give credit where it is due, but what good does it do to to help a child early in life only to fail them later on when they must leave the classroom and face the real world?

The truth of the matter is that our teachers here do make a considerable amount more than teachers in other districts and when faced with the tough decisions to cut salaries and benefits like any smart business owner would do, we instead cut valuable programs and make the children suffer. This begs the question of whether those holding the purse strings are more concerned with maintaining a quality of living for teachers or a quality of education for students. I should hope it be the latter, but circumstances show otherwise.

None of this, however, even begins to touch upon the coming pension crisis and the fact that employer contribution rates for benefits will skyrocket from their current level of 8.65% to over 30% in the next 2-3 years. I even saw Mr. Murray alluding to this in his recent op-ed preparing people for yet another year of tax increases which will not be the last.

There is no envy or contempt here, Mr. Morris, only the cold hard reality of failing schools and a disastrous financial outlook. Facts, Mr. Morris, they are indeed stubborn things.

Eyes Wide Shut

2011-07-16T23:50:00.000-07:00

A person once asked me why I carry a gun. They wanted to know if I had been robbed or attacked in the past and wondered what motivated me to carry a firearm. I told them I carry because I want to make sure I am prepared if any of those things ever did occur.

This and other conversations sparked an inquisition in my own mind as to why others perceive carrying a weapon as such an odd or out of place behavior. Surely it cannot be they think crime is non-existent even in our rural area. Murders happen as do robberies and all sorts of crime. If there was no threat of crime then we would not need police, but as it stands there is a law enforcement division in nearly every community in this area.

Collectively we know crime is a risk yet the sight of someone armed to protect themselves from that risk is viewed by some to be improper or uncouth.

What is particularly strange in my mind are the parents who look upon me with reproach when I take my children to the playground sporting my glock. Strange because most of those same people will alleviate their concerns if they see a person guarding an armored car or a bank armed to protect money, but someone who is there to protect their own human child is somehow out of place. What is more valuable; a replaceable sum of money or the invaluable life of a son or daughter?

Just the other day I was at the park and a man driving a van was sitting in his vehicle watching the children. Several of the parents became concerned and when I walked by his van with my gun in plain sight and he drove away. I later found that this man has been a concern for the police around children.

I can only come to the conclusion that what makes me strange to these people is I choose to walk in this world with my eyes open. I recognize evil exists in this world and sometimes good people need to defend themselves against it. This does not mean I go looking for trouble and it doesn't mean I want it; it simply means I preemptively choose not to become a hapless victim.

The world is full of people who have seen evil face to face and have the physical and mental scars to show for it. Pretending there is never a need to take measures to protect and defend the ones you love is a reckless attitude; police reports around this country are full of those who invested in such ignorant bliss.

Is this something people want to hear? Probably not. That is why they view those of us who carry firearms so negatively at times. It is a constant reminder of a fact they want to obviate from their minds.

Ignorance may be bliss but it won't stop a rapist or a murderer when they choose to make you or those you love their next victim. My .45, however, will.

The true power of a juror

2011-06-17T11:25:00.000-07:00

There is a great power vested in the hands of citizens who sit as jurors during a trial of their fellow citizen. To many it is unknown and in our modern court system it is mostly forgotten, but it still exists with as much relevance today as it ever held in the past.

This power is the ability to nullify unjust law by judging not only the evidence but the merits of the law as well.

Jury nullification, as it is commonly known, finds its roots in common law and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, which states:

“No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.”

Since then there have been many cases in which a defendant has been acquitted due to a jury finding against the law itself. The very first Chief Justice of our Supreme Court, John Jay, stated to jurors, ”You have a right to take upon yourselves to judge [both the facts and law]. “

As time went on judges began to disfavor this practice and deny the knowledge of this power to juries when they gave instruction before trial. However, this right of a jury still exists and during prohibition was used on a large scale to overturn convictions for charges of bootlegging and trading alcohol. Many scholars believe jury nullification is what finally led to the 21st Amendment repealing the 18th amendment which had banned alcohol distribution in the United States.

In our modern day and age, we are bogged down by so many unjust laws and many feel helpless at the onslaught of charges that can be filed against a person for victimless crimes. In the end, though, it is not the legislators, the police, the judges, or even the prosecutors who decide the fate of our fellow citizens...it is us: the citizen jurors.

The power to end injustice lies with you. Take back your power as a citizen and whenever you find yourself in the position of a juror remember that you have the power to nullify the law if you and your peers deem it unjust.

Civil Forfeiture: Tyranny In America

2011-06-07T21:41:00.000-07:00

Imagine living in a country where your personal property can be seized by government officials without evidence of a crime. Picture yourself having to argue your innocence and provide a judge with an argument placing the burden of proof upon you and not the government. After you lose and the local D.A. justifies the seizure of your property it is sold off and the proceeds are placed into a fund. This fund is secret and by law is not open to public scrutiny. No citizen can see how the property is taken or how the money gained from the sale of seized property is spent.

This sounds like communist China or perhaps some third world dictatorship, right? It is, in fact, the current law in Pennsylvania and many other states.

Under such law, known as “civil forfeiture”, privately owned property can be seized by law enforcement under the mere suspicion that it has been or is going to be used in a criminal act. Due process and individual property rights disappear in veil of bureaucratic smoke all in the name of fighting the war on drugs and crime.

As a result of these types of laws many abuses have arisen including a restaurant owner in Allentown, PA who had his business seized after multiple complaints to police about drug deals on his property. Ironically, he was the one making the complaints in an attempt to get rid of those selling drugs and in a bizarre turn of events to justify their actions police had the drug dealers testify against the business owner in court.

More recently, in Tennessee, local news reporters have uncovered video of police officers shaking down motorists and performing illegal searches in order to seize money that they suspect might be related to drug trafficking. If the people who are victimized by this process want to get their property back they must file in civil court and prove their innocence. Several of these cases have shown that police have seized property that had nothing to do with drugs.

The increasing danger of having these laws in place is that they provide an incentive for law enforcement to violate the liberties of innocent people in order to profit themselves. With the economy in a downward spiral and ever shrinking federal and state money who is to say that in an effort to obtain funding for our increasingly futile efforts to fight the war on drugs more innocent people may not be targeted? And who will know? None of us can see what is going on behind that iron curtain of secrecy.

Civil forfeiture is just another piece of rotten fruit from the tree of fighting the hopeless war on drugs. We must ask ourselves if further infringement on personal liberty in the name of failed policy is something we are willing to accept as a society. Our children are not being made safer, our cities are growing more and more violent, and police are becoming highwaymen and thugs. When will we say enough is enough?

What will you do when SWAT comes knocking on your door and shoots first and asks questions later like they did to the innocent Marine, Jose Guerena, who served his country and survived two tours in Iraq only to be gunned down in his own home as a result of a no-knock warrant which yielded no evidence? Is stopping someone from smoking a plant or getting high really worth the complete erosion of our civil liberty and the destruction of our inner cities? At what point will you look around and see that our culture has become like the famous police inspector Javert from Les Misérables who became so obsessed with his misguided sense of justice he lost all common sense and human compassion.

Its time for us to admit the war on drugs has failed and that laws like civil forfeiture are nothing more than abject tyranny that should be purged from our state and our nation along with the failed drug policy that made it possible.

For more information on PA forfeiture laws please check out the following links:

http://www.ij.org/about/3280

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/42/00.068..HTM

In response to Fred Bucheit

2011-05-31T16:13:00.000-07:00

Below is a response sent in by me to the local paper. These anti gun individuals need to be corrected whenever possible. They love to quote statistics and twist truth but when confronted with even the smallest amount of intellectual honesty their entire argument crumbles to pieces.

Original LTE:

Fired up over firearms

Which country arms its thugs, gang members, misfits, its paranoid and delusional with the most advanced guns in the world? Read on.

In these United States 120 people were shot yesterday, 120 people will be shot today and 120 people will be shot tomorrow. This has been the case for decades. Thirty people are murdered with guns every day of the year in the United States - a plane load of people a week, 52 plane loads a year. A dozen police will be murdered with guns this month. When foreign terrorists took down four plane loads of people we declared war and sent out Predator drones. Why do we ignore our homegrown terrorist debacle?

In 1997 firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada and 5,285 in the United States. The United States has the highest number of gun-related deaths among the 36 most wealthy nations of the world (CDC stats).

Timothy Havener promotes the carrying of guns by everyone. Does that make sense? If everyone at the meeting with U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson were armed, would Jared Lee Loughner have been able to slaughter all the people he did? Yes, he would have - he did it all in seconds. If everyone there had had guns it is most likely it would have turned into a shootout with many more deaths and injuries. The notion of the good guy in the white hat shooting the bag guy is a myth created by the movies.

When terrorists took over planes did the Transportation Security Administration arm everyone or disarm everyone in the plane as a response? They made the sensible, rational decision, thank goodness. We are all on a plane called earth.

There are millions of uncontrolled guns in this country and tens of thousands of people who should not even own a hammer. The horrific, preventable loss of life is the result. Everyone of those people murdered by guns was guaranteed an inalienable right to life in the Declaration of Independence, the foundation ideal of the Constitution. It is obvious that all rights overlap, and here is one good example; the gun rights zealots will never admit that, however; they are absolutists.

One of the arguments of the gun rights people is that they need those guns in case they need to "take back their country." What could they be smoking? Are they going to take on the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and the state police? One of the greatest documents ever created is the Constitution. The gun rights zealots mock that document with their hysterical pronouncements. Our noble founding fathers gave us the ballot so that we would not have to resort to the bullet for settling disputes as had been the case for millennia; it is obvious that some people prefer the bullet - the law of the jungle. These are the proud and the arrogant who refuse to accept the rule of law as made by "we the people;" they want to be judge, jury and executioner.

I support Havener's right to own and carry a gun because I believe in the law, and that is the law currently. I also believe that the blood of the people shot and killed by guns in the 20th century is on the hands of not only the criminals but the legislators and judges who refuse to control the sale and use of guns - they all take an oath in which they swear to protect us, but they don't.

It is absurd when every Tom, Dick and Mary can buy a gun as if they were candy bars as proven by Colin Goddard, a student who was shot four times at Virginia Tech. It is outrageous when our students and all of us must live in fear because guns are as common and available as dandelions in the field.

My response:

Where do I begin?

Well, let's start with your quotation of statistics from the CDC. If you look at a report from the CDC published in 2003 they were unable to find any direct relation between firearm ownership and gun violence. This means that despite your implications they found no justification for restrictions on gun ownership with the all data they had processed.

To put your statistics in the proper context we may also look at the CDC statistics on motor vehicle accidents. Their website states the following:

“Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death among those age 5-34 in the U.S.1 More than 2.3 million adult drivers and passengers were treated in emergency departments as the result of being injured in motor vehicle crashes in 2009”

That is over 6,300 people a day injured by motor vehicles compared to the 120 people a day that are injured by firearms. So by comparison you should be far more outraged that nearly anyone can go out and get behind the wheel of their very own death machine and drive freely on the public highways.

Also, when a person commits a crime with a firearm they are permanently barred from ever owning a gun again, but a person who commits a crime with a car can go out and have their driving rights restored.

Let's move on to look at your criticism of guns in the vein of protecting our freedom. As a gun owner I abhor the thought of an armed revolution. I roundly criticize those who preach about such actions, however, the ultimate purpose of an armed society is by its very nature a deterrent against tyranny in government. As the great liberal, Thomas Jefferson, once said:

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" - Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Though it is a deplorable last measure, the right to keep and bear arms is our last defense against tyranny. And I must note that, in my opinion, we are very far from that option being a reality in the near future and those that espouse such ideas over civil debate and peaceful political action are dangerous fools who should be marginalized.

Now as a final rebuttal of your argument I will take on your claim that I am encouraging the sale of guns to just any “Tom, Dick and Mary”, as you put it. This is patently absurd; no random individual can just go and get a gun and carry it around without going through a background check for purchase and they must be a permitted individual to own firearms. To say it is like buying a candy bar is dishonest and untruthful.

What you lack in facts you make up for in passion, Mr. Bucheit. I appreciate your opinion and I am glad to have someone like you out there expressing their first amendment rights. I hope that people like yourself may come to realize that individual freedom is not a collective bargaining agreement and that just because you may feel passionately about an issue, it does not give you the pervue to have liberty taken from others by political force. If you pursue your current course of action, you may find one day, as the German Pastor Martin Niemöller discovered, that there is no one left to speak for you or defend you when your rights are being taken away.

Inconvienent Liberty

2011-05-21T21:18:00.001-07:00

The following is an open letter to our legislators requesting action for the actions of Philadelphia. We need to hold every official in every part of this state accountable to respect our civil liberties.

Dear Legislator,

Saturday, May 21st, Foxnews published a story on its website about a law abiding gun owner who had his rights violated by Philadelphia Police. One might assume that after all the negative attention this story has brought upon the Philadelphia Police Department and the possibility of pending litigation they might try and diffuse the situation by showing law abiding gun owners they have some remorse.

In all of their wisdom, Philadelphia’s finest have made it clear that they are not only unapologetic for the actions of their officers, but they are doubling down on their policy to harass and violate the rights of the people of this state.

The Foxnews story states the following:

“…local authorities are warning gun owners that they will be “inconvenienced” if they carry unconcealed handguns in the city.”

Reading that statement I must ask myself where such a thought may arise. In Pennsylvania our state Constitution clearly says that “The right of the citizen to bear arms…shall not be questioned.”

Philadelphia justifies its actions in mistreating law abiding gun owners by utilizing Title 18 Section 6108 of our state law which grants status to Philadelphia as a “city of the first class”. This requires that a person in Philadelphia must obtain a license to carry in order to carry openly, whereas in the rest of the state carrying a firearm openly while on foot does not require a licensee.

In spite of this statute being a questionable violation of equal protection, it still does not justify the type of invasive police activity being supported by the Philadelphia Police Department. Carrying a firearm in Pennsylvania is not reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.(see Hawkins v Commonwealth)

We live in a state with a lot of history and Philadelphia is rich with that heritage. I find it disturbing as an American citizen that in the very birthplace of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights that citizens are subject to such abuse by their public officials.

As a citizen of this state I beg of our elected members that they move to protect their people from the potential hazard of being drawn down upon and shot by an officer of the law for simply exercising a basic civil liberty.

There is no set of special circumstances that grants any city the right to suspend civil rights and flagrantly question a right that by law “shall not be questioned”.

Sincerely,

Timothy L. Havener

The Case for Open Carry

2011-05-17T20:58:00.001-07:00

Several months ago, a fellow gun rights activist, Mark Fiorino was arrested in the City of Philadelphia for openly carrying a firearm. He was breaking no law and possessed a valid License to Carry Firearms. He was stopped at gunpoint by a police officer and threatened with deadly force. After a profanity laced tirade by the arresting officer and several of his companions Mark was held for 45 minutes and then released when it was realized he was committing no crime.

Mark had been recording the incident due to previous problems with Philadelphia police regarding this issue. He posted a copy of the audio onto a popular gun rights forum PAFOA.org. After asking his permission I cut up the audio and posted it on youtube.

Within a week the youtube posting had over 30,000 views and had drawn the ire of the D.A.'s office. A decision was made to file charges against Mark for reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct. Five police officers were sent to his place of employment to arrest him. He was not at work at the time and after obtaining legal counsel turned himself in to answer the charges.

As outrage grew within the gun rights community, plans for a protest were formed. On May 14th those plans culminated with 40 gun owners standing in front of city hall in Centre City, Philadelphia openly carrying firearms and asserting their rights. The event was coordinated with the Philadelphia police department and there were no negative encounters. The rally marched from city hall through the streets up to Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell.

The following Monday Mark's story made the front page of the Philadelphia Daily News and soon became a nationwide story.

These events have brought forth much debate over not only the right to carry but the right to openly carry a firearm.

While many people are uncomfortable with the idea of open carry it is a fundamental part of the right to bear arms. To those that would condemn anyone for exercising this right under our Constitution and our laws I would ask: What are you so afraid of?

Many people accept that bearing arms in self defense is a right but they believe that concealing a firearm is the only acceptable way to exercise that right. Openly displaying a gun is considered by some to be offensive behavior and inappropriate in public places. The cognitive dissonance in this assertion astounds me.

The first and most common argument against open carry is that it may frighten people so you should be considerate and “cover up” for the sake of others. This seems like a common sense argument on its face until you peel back the facade and reveal the absurd nature of its logical conclusion. Some people irrationally fear many things...should we try and prevent everyone from experiencing these fears by restricting the actions of others? Of course not.

The defense given to these fears rises from the argument that people might not know who you are so they might be afraid because you are carrying a gun. Well, let's just take the fact that there are more deaths from car accidents every year than deaths related to firearms. All of us willingly trust our fellow citizens behind the wheel of a car, yet if we see them with a gun some are overcome with a fear that defies reason. If seeing an armed citizen with a gun strikes fear into your heart I would suggest that you might want to give up driving anywhere.

The other argument presented is slightly more valid but has its own fallacy. Some will say that carrying a firearm openly makes you a target and that criminals will come after you if they see your gun. Statistically, this is not an absolute truth. In a Department of Justice poll of violent criminals 57% of them said they fear a law abiding citizen with a gun more than they fear the police. I will grant this argument the concession that an infinitesimal chance may arise where one really crazy person may see your gun and attempt to target you. However this must be weighed against the benefit of deterring criminal activity and preventing the need to draw or use your gun because the mere sight of an armed citizen caused a potential criminal to move on.

In the end, it is my opinion that it should be the choice of the individual which risks they are willing to assume based on any applicable circumstances. There is no overarching benefit to either method of carrying a firearm that invalidates the other.

The final and most compelling argument for open carry is that criminals do not openly carry their firearms. This is by far the most vital invalidation of the opposition to open carry. If you see a person with a holstered firearm they are more than likely a law abiding citizen just exercising their legal right to bear arms. While law abiding people may conceal their firearms, it is also the preferred method of carry for criminals. It is not the gun you can see that is to be feared...it is the one you don't see coming. Myself and others who carry openly consider it a courtesy to allow our fellow citizens to know that we are armed and of no concern to them.

Lastly, I suggest to those that still abhor the sight of a gun on the hip of someone in public to ask themselves when freedom became such a sin. I was in Avenue 209 getting coffee and some Chinese exchange students behind me in line asked me about my gun and I explained our rights in America. They come from a country where you can't fight back and the only person with a gun is the government official holding it to your head. I think in our modern mindset of misplaced common sense we have learned to disdain the most essential of our freedoms and view them in a negative light. Fear has replaced what should be pride in the ability to exercise so freely ones right defend themselves.

When such a basic freedom is a blight to the public eye and the right must be hidden away for fear of condemnation I must ask in what sense do we retain the ability to say we cherish any freedom? At that point our perceptions have become a dichotomous betrayal of our stated principles.

If you see myself or any other person armed in public, rather than mock or condemn us, I would encourage you to stop and take a moment to thank whatever god you pray to that we live a nation where we the people possess such liberty and freedom.

Is an Anarchist a Libertarian?

2011-05-01T10:19:00.001-07:00

One of the most common battles I face as a Libertarian is the automatic assumption that I am an anarchist. Many times this distracts from an issue that I am trying to discuss because I must defend my own philosophical position and clarify it for others. This takes the wind out of the sails for many Libertarians trying to make legitimate inroads to our political system by constantly being associated with the philosophy of Anarchism.

When I think of the founders of libertarianism I immediately think of men like Thomas Jefferson, John Locke, and Thomas Paine. These great thinkers espoused the rights of men and a limited government to ensure the protection of rights. They did not believe in the abolition of government or no state at all.

How is it then that modern libertarianism is almost always associated with anarchism which believes in absolutely no state at all?

Anarcho-capitalism and no-state solutions have crept their way into the Libertarian movement clinging to the non-coercion principle as their claim to the destruction of all government in society. This thinking has hi-jacked the original ideas of limited government and replaced them with idealistic notions of a world that needs no government.

Not only is anarchy an idea that can be proven faulty by thousands of years of human history but it always leads to tyranny. Anarchists like to paint a rosy picture of volunteerism where every one works together with no structure in society to ensure their liberty. It is, in fact, a child's fanciful dream that belongs in a Gene Roddenberry novel rather than in the realm of human political philosophy. In an anarchist's world they would likely be the first swallowed up by the inevitable tyrants that would rise out of such an environment.

But to the question: Are anarchists libertarians?

The goal of libertarians is to provide a world in which liberty is preserved and society can function. Anarchists simply want a world where freedom is the absolute with no regard to the consequences as to what such a reality would bring forth. Even if they claim their ideas work there is so much evidence to counter such an idea that we must assume they are either fools or deliberately misleading others. If sustainable liberty is your goal then anarchism cannot be viewed as a viable option for those that choose to call themselves libertarians. In fact, I would purport the idea that anarchism is indeed not only anti-libertarian but a completely different political philosophy altogether.

This past weekend the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania moved to restructure our state platform to rid itself of any direct affiliation with anarchist philosophy. I applaud this move and I look forward to growing a party that stands on principle for the cause of liberty open to common sense ideas about how to effectively solve the problems in this state.

Come join us in the cause of liberty and limited government to ensure a free and prosperous future for all the citizens of Pennsylvania.

Join the Libertarian Party today by visiting us at http://www.lppa.org

Yelling Fire In A Crowded Theatre

2011-04-20T20:12:00.001-07:00

The usurpers of individual freedom and sovereignty have coined a phrase which they use quite often to justify unnecessary restrictions on our rights: "You can't yell fire in a crowded theater."

I will concede, the idea that rights do have some restrictions in a free society is valid , but not often in the context used by those who put forth the notion. The criteria of limitation should be set by the encroachment of one right upon another. Stating you cannot yell fire in a crowded theater only remains valid if there is no fire because in doing so you are encroaching on the rights of others to enjoy their entertainment without the very real danger of a stampede toward the exit. Conversely, if there is a fire and you verbosely utter its presence you would be met with appreciation and thanks and would not have stepped across the line of encroachment.

Our natural rights within a civil society are compromised to some extent by default. We must accept some infringement on the natural state of our liberty where our rights may infringe on others. This is the basis for law and all reasonable restrictions on our rights. What we must never accept, however, are restrictions based on the faulty premise of safety and protection from what may occur. When we enter this territory we lay liberty upon a sacrificial altar and entomb justice in a grave of conceit.

The road to tyranny is often paved with the good intentions of well meaning people trying to protect us from ourselves when they should be more worried about protecting themselves from the rogue power of a government not bound by strict constitutional limitations.

No man's individual freedom should be taken for the potential risk of what may happen or what might occur. If an act or a purported act in itself is not criminal by nature then there is no justification for a restriction upon the freedom of the individual.

Unfortunately , we now live in a world where a free man is a criminal if he steps across imaginary borders set by the whim of policy instead of the immovable standard of just law set in accordance with true violations of the rights of others. Crime has become a matter of happenstance. We have so many laws that no one could possibly know if any random action is or might be a crime.

Most of us just try to get by and follow the rules and if one of us happens to find themselves on the wrong side of that imaginary line we look the other way and pat ourselves on the back for being such good, law abiding citizens when the reality we fail to see is that we are nothing more than slaves within the confines of a prison where our warden has not chosen to punish our actions.

American justice is a fleeting thought replaced by Machiavellian politics and a system by which the illusion of freedom exists in the stead of true liberty and freedom.

My friends, we are at a tipping point in our nation's history. We can choose our gilded prison and ignore the warning signs or we can retake what is rightfully ours as sovereigns. However, if we choose not to act the comfortable cage will one day turn to a rotten cell that offers no illusion, just the cold reality of a dead dream and a wasted life.

Take what is yours and never let anyone convince you it is a crime to be free.

Blame Muhammad

2011-04-18T21:03:00.000-07:00

There seems to be a mentality among many Americans these days that Islam and terrorism are one in the same. Even when you can provide examples of peaceful, non violent Muslims the argument is shifted into a suspicion of their motivations based on the singular notion that Islam is an evil religion that creates terrorism.

While there are many problems in parts of the world where a majority of the population is Muslim and there have been attacks by radical Muslims we must look at what this rhetoric is actually doing: demonizing an entire group of people based on their religious convictions without any consideration for individual beliefs.

Whatever your feelings of the Muslim faith itself you must consider the consequences of categorizing people based on their religious faith alone. If you follow this road of suspecting everyone who is a Muslim what precedent are you setting for violation of civil liberty? To what extent will those of a certain faith be subjected to discrimination? Who gets to determine the arbitration of that process?

The reaction of blaming all Muslims or casting Islam in a negative light as a whole is instinctive and comes from a desire to protect ourselves and our families from potential threats. In reality what is done by tolerating such bias is opening the door to more invasive policies that end up stripping all people of their rights. There is no need for discrimination at that point because everyone is a terrorist who even remotely poses a threat to the system we have sanctioned to protect us. Government will hold the power we have given it to steal liberty at will for its own service.

We are a nation based on the rights of the individual. As such we should treat all citizens with the respect due to them as individuals and not let the actions of others color our opinion of them if they happen to share the same religion or race. Everyone deserves a chance to prove themselves and have their rights upheld by society. These are the most basic principles of American justice; let us never forget them.

Don’t “salt” us with failed policy

2011-04-12T20:31:00.000-07:00

Today I read in the paper that the City of Lock Haven is considering a ban on ‘bath salts’, a synthetic drug that gives users a cocaine-like high. The legislature is also considering a bill to ban sales of the drug statewide.

What we must ask ourselves is not whether this drug or others are “bad”, but rather what will be the ultimate outcome of following down the same familiar road of prohibition?

Ask yourself. Are we going to stop people from using these drugs? Will these drugs still be sold? And by whom?

If you look at other currently illegal drugs the answers will present themselves. As with drugs like marijuana and cocaine they will still be sold, but not by legitimate business owners; instead criminals will be profiting from the distribution mixing god knows what into the drugs to dilute and increase profits while creating an even greater risk to the public.

Instead of keeping these drugs out of the hands of under age children we will be providing more ample opportunity for high school kids to get access. Just as with other illegal drugs the problem is not that we don’t have enough control over them, but that we have absolutely no control over them. Ask any high school kid and he or she will tell you that it is easier for them to buy a joint than it is to buy alcohol and cigarettes.

We should know by now that these policies don’t work, they empower criminals, distract law enforcement, and put the public at greater risk for violent crime. The war on drugs has lasted over 40 years and we have nothing to show for it but emaciated inner cities, skyrocketing crime, and some of the highest levels of drug use among teens ever.

You must understand that I am NOT advocating drug use. I am simply pointing out the failure of our current laws and the insanity in doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

As an example of how things could be, look at Portugal, where they decriminalized drug use in 2000. There were cries from those who said that drug use would skyrocket just as there was when prohibition was repealed here in the U.S. with naysayers claiming we would become a “nation of alcoholics”. Just as it was then so it is now: patently false. Portugal has seen dramatic decreases in drug use and in particular, heroin addiction has plummeted.

In addition to effectively curbing drug usage we have an added effect by decriminalizing that our prison system will no longer be burdened by non-violent drug offenders and the lives of young people will no longer be ruined by arrest records that haunt them the rest of their lives.

Ending prohibition will also get addicts the help they need without fear of the police and potential criminal charges. For instance, a friend told me of a relative who overdosed and was left alone to die by her companions for fear of being arrested. How many addicts do not come forward because of this fear and how many more could we help if police were seen as being there to help and not to arrest?

Many law enforcement officers and community leaders across the country are beginning to see the light and are advocating for an end to this failed war on drugs. Even prominent members of the religious community like Pat Robertson have spoken out about ending prohibition.

The question I would raise to the City Council is one that I would ask any American: haven’t you had enough of failed policies that endanger our communities and ruin lives? Isn’t it time to try something different?

Don’t beat your head against that wall anymore. Do what is right for you and your community and speak out. It’s time to end the War On Drugs.

The Road Forgotten

2011-04-07T19:19:00.001-07:00

We go through the motions of honoring freedom and liberty living our placid lives convincing ourselves that we did enough to clothe a disfigured reality in a patriotic semblance of what only exists as a notion in the minds of a few lone voices crying out to be heard by ears deafened to the sound of reason and blinded to the light of our lady's torch illuminating a path long forgotten.

The days grow dark as freedom becomes a crime while any who speak out are crushed beneath the heel of those who shade once bright skies with the pragmatic wisdom of fools and a common sense that is all too common and all too vacant of any sense. The fearful hand over what is theirs by birthright to appease men that sell them out to slave masters who steal their dreams and replace them with manufactured ideas that stink of conformity, bleed dry the imagination, and starve creativity.

Our children are born into servitude as arrogant leaders betray what is left of our honor and kill in our name to satisfy a cast of vultures who stand ready to pick clean the bones of the innocent. Meanwhile, we sit by watching callously consumed by a voracious appetite and shameless hunger feeding ravenously on the scraps of our own dignity.

With tear stained cheeks I look out upon the wasteland of a once great land and the dark horizon seems unending, but while hope seems lost, a faint light still shines on what seems like a foreign shore. A proud woman stretches out her arms to show me that forgotten road and holds in her hand the words of wisdom and justice to guide me along the way.

As I follow her light and walk down that ancient path I look back and see her torch burning ever so slightly a little brighter than before.

Coming out of the closet

2011-04-03T02:47:00.001-07:00

If there is one group of people that gun owners could learn from and empathize with it would be the gay and lesbian rights movement. Gun owners and people who carry firearms, especially those who do so openly, are condemned by many as committing some unseemly act that needs to be hidden away from public view in a manner that is similar to how society has treated the gay and lesbian community.

Ironically, the anti-gun movement uses the same arguments that conservatives use against homosexuals. For instance, they both want us to think of the children and they both want us to keep our actions a secret and hide away our deviant behavior lest anyone be offended.

In response to the anti gay sentiment present in society many brave homosexuals came out of the “closet” and refused to accept the reproach of society and boisterously opposed anyone who tried to bully them or make them back down.

In the beginning, there weren’t many who had the courage to take a stand for gay rights, but as a few strong willed individuals paved the road more followed and today we see a much larger mainstream gay and lesbian culture that is widely accepted by most people save a few religious zealots who hold firm to their antiquated beliefs.

With gun owners the correlation can be made by those of us who have seen our actions condemned and our rights eroded. People want us to hide away in the background and they chastise us for exercising what is as natural a right as any other, including the right to choose you own personal relationships based on your inclinations.

Just as with the gay rights movement a few brave souls have taken up the charge, coming out of the “closet” by openly expressing their second amendment rights. However, to see the same success as our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters we need not do nearly as much or put out nearly as much effort. We represent a larger cross section of this country that encompasses all races, religions, and, of course, sexual orientations; if only more of us would shake off the shackles of polite inanity, we could rise up with one voice and say, “We’re here. We’re armed. Get used to it.”

An "open" letter to my fellow gun owners

2011-03-27T21:55:00.001-07:00

Dear Fellow Gun Owners,

I posed a question to a local law enforcement officer and asked him when he last arrested a criminal carrying a holstered firearm openly. He paused for a moment and admitted he couldn't remember. I have gotten similar responses from other police officers I have asked that question and the reason is very simple: criminals don't open carry.

Openly carrying a firearm gets some mixed responses from the public and police. While most will agree it is legal and it is your right they often decry open carry based on so-called “common sense” arguments that present themselves as rational and reasonable. I will show you they are nothing of the sort.

One of these arguments is that a criminal will take your gun or see your gun and it will make you a target. However, if you look at studies done by the Department of Justice 57% of criminals polled in prison say they fear one thing more than police...an armed citizen. Most criminals are not looking to make their job more difficult. They want easy targets and don't want to risk their own lives. So, more times than not, openly carrying a firearm will actually deter a crime before it happens. If you happen to be concealing your gun, you will just appear like everyone else, and in a situation where you have to draw your gun and fire it in defense your risk factor goes up substantially when the situation might have been avoided altogether had the assailants seen you were armed to begin with.

If you happen to think this is mere bunk then you might want to talk to the police in Kennesaw, GA who arrested a group of armed criminals outside a Waffle House who had told the police they decided not to rob the business because one of them who was sent in to scout saw two men openly carrying firearms.

An analogy to clarify this idea is to look around at all those little signs in people's yards letting everyone know their home is protected by a security system. They "advertise" like this to let any potential criminal know that they should move on to the next house because their home is protected. Open carry is a gun owners way of doing exactly the same thing.

Open Carry deters crime.

Another word of wisdom from the “common sense” crowd is that people can be frightened by your gun and it might draw negative attention from the public. While this may be true on its face due to sheer ignorance, when I ask people, “Don't you want to know who has a gun around you?”, most will admit that they do.

In the past, concealing a weapon was a crime while openly carrying a gun or other weapons was the sign of a gentleman or an honest citizen exercising his right to bear arms. Only in modern times has that role been reversed and indeed to the detriment of public safety and to the rights of gun owners. I do respect the desire to carry concealed but in context it should be considered the more deviant method to carry a weapon as it is the chosen method of criminals. Openly carrying a firearm is a sign that you have nothing to hide and that you are simply an honest, law abiding citizen carrying a gun for self defense.

Criminals conceal, law abiding citizens carry openly.

Finally, we come to the conceited wisdom that those of us who open carry are going to ruin it for everyone else and make the government pass laws that further restrict the right to keep and bear arms.

First of all, please provide one example of this occurring. Not only can you not provide such an example, it is more likely that we have had encroaching laws that violate our second amendment because gun owners have not been visible exercising their rights. I am sure the individuals offering their saged advice would have condemned Rosa Parks for not taking the back seat because she was generating negative attention to the rights of African Americans. It amazes me to see fellow gun owners condemning legal, responsible activity that helps educate the public on gun rights.

Secondly, the idea that we should lay low and not alert anyone to our rights only serves those who blossom from ignorance and seek to slowly strip away our rights piece by piece. Ask the gun owners of England and Australia how that worked out for them.

Open carry educates the public.

While I am making these points let me make it clear that I do not condemn anyone for how they choose to exercise their right to bear arms. I simply hope that someone who has bought into the argument that those who open carry are irresponsible and harming the second amendment will take a second look at the facts and apply some real common sense to their opinions instead of listening to those who would hide themselves in the shadows and demean those of us who are trying to help restore the right to bear arms to its rightful place in society as a respectable and responsible activity that no one need fear or resent.

Be armed. Be safe.

Sincerely,

Timothy Havener

The misnomer of public health and safety

2011-03-24T10:38:00.001-07:00

Most people today assume that their government is there to protect them and keep them safe. They also imagine that police are there to do what their motto states, “To Protect and to Serve”. It gives many comfort to think our public officials are watching over us and keeping us safe and providing for the safety of the public.

In reality those ideas couldn’t be farther from the truth.

There has been case after case in which it is clearly set forth that government has no constitutional duty to protect anyone. The most notable of these is Warren v. The District of Columbia where three women were brutally raped over an extended period of time even after police had been called to the scene. The court found that despite the ineptitude of the police and the 911 operator there was no liability to the government, its officials, or the police for not providing adequate protection.

When our officials are sworn into office they swear to uphold the law and our constitution. They do not swear an oath to be your personal bodyguard or guarantee your health and well being. It is only their duty to provide you justice under the law when your rights are violated by others and ensure that your rights are protected.

The very purpose of legislation and law under the guidelines of our constitution is to ensure justice and liberty not to provide for the safety and health of the people. A law may be put forth to ensure that your rights are protected and that no one may take actions that harm you or your environment but there is no liability upon our government or its representatives when someone violates those laws and does you harm. Governments, federal, state, and local only have the authority to punish, not to prevent, and in reality they cannot prevent bad things from happening to you or anyone else and to elude that they can is disingenuous.

If a government does take upon itself the duty of protection to which it has no legal obligation or reasonable expectation to provide it grants itself a power to infringe upon liberty for the stated purpose of a goal it cannot fulfill. This is why Benjamin Franklin said that those who sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither.

You and I are the arbiters of our own destiny. Our lives are our own and they belong to us to protect and preserve. Governments and their officials are not there to provide us with safety they exist to to maintain the rule of law and mete out justice when a right or law is violated.

To perpetuate the liberty of the people the duty of our elected and public officials must be restricted to the bounds of their constitutional obligations.

The Lawless State of Public Office

2011-03-23T14:47:00.001-07:00

What would you think of someone who wrote bad checks, had multiple DUI’s, shoplifted, or committed simple assault? As far as the law is concerned they are criminals and the penalties for such crimes are first and second degree misdemeanors in the state of Pennsylvania punishable by up to two to five years in prison.

What most people don’t know is that there are crimes which are equal to these that apply to violations of our rights. Under the PA crimes code Title 18, Chapter 53 it states:

“A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity
or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits
a misdemeanor of the second degree if, knowing that his conduct
is illegal, he:
(1) subjects another to arrest, detention, search,
seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien or
other infringement of personal or property rights; or
(2) denies or impedes another in the exercise or
enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.”

This means that any public official that even impedes your enjoyment of a right while executing his or her duties is committing a crime that is punishable by up to two years in prison.

All across this state we have examples of officials doing just that with no accountability. They trespass on our right to keep and bear arms, our police regularly violate the fourth amendment, and officials often make comments that have a chilling effect on liberty “impeding” the exercise of freedoms that are ours by right.

Our state law even has provisions that prevent local governments from restricting our second amendment rights to bear arms yet city after city and town after town have done so. What is more, the Uniform Firearms Act includes a penalty clause which in addition to the abuse of office provision adds a misdemeanor one to the offense which is punishable by up to five years in prison.

The demands of the law are clear but their administration is not equal in most localities and with positions of authority. Our leaders have forgotten that they are just as accountable to obey the law as we are. To extenuate the problem most District Attorneys or prosecutors have not had the courage to do their job and justly apply the law to private citizens and public officials with equal fortitude.

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said, “If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”

You and I are not given latitude to break the law and allowed to claim ignorance as an excuse, why then are elected and public officials allowed to do the same and even at times willfully violate the law to serve their own purpose without being punished? If the people who are applying the law to us are not held accountable to the same rule of law how can anyone expect to receive justice and more importantly how can the people be expected to hold that law in any high regard?

The pen is mightier than the gun

2011-03-11T00:08:00.000-08:00

One of the common arguments used by those who support “reasonable” restrictions on the right to bear arms is that our forefathers could not have imagined the types of guns and armaments that exist today compared to the firearms of their day. They say that the second amendment was never meant to cover machine guns or other modern weapons and restricting ownership of certain guns is acceptable under this presumption. It is often members of the press who advocate such a view and utilize their freedom of speech and the press to spread their opinion on the subject.

Well, my dear members of the fourth pillar…people who live in glass houses should refrain from throwing stones. To quote a phrase frequently referenced by you and your peers, “The pen is mightier than the sword.” and not only mightier but far more dangerous than any gun in the hands of a citizen.

Where it is argued that guns today do not fall under the intent of the 2nd amendment one might make a similar argument for mediums that are used for the expression of the 1st amendment. At the time of the founding the only implements for expressing speech were written or printed word. There was no way our forefathers could have imagined a media that could broadcast instantly to any home across the country. There is also no manner by which we could assume that they would have considered the invention of radio, television, or the internet.

For a perfect example of the dangerous power wielded by such mediums we needn’t look far. In 1938, Orson Wells produced a radio dramatization which convinced some people that we were in the midst of an invasion. As a result of the ‘War of the Worlds’ broadcast several people committed suicide while others fled in panic causing mass hysteria. All of this because someone expressed their first amendment rights; surely this type of broadcast is something that was not covered under the original intent of those who drafted our Constitution and should be an example of why reasonable restrictions on free speech should be considered.

The modern media holds great influence over the public and can be misused in the wrong hands to do great harm. The power still exists to spread misinformation and with the ability to disseminate information so quickly wouldn’t it be rational to place restrictions on these mediums that could never have been imagined by men who lived over 200 years ago?

If you think my analogy is completely off base then perhaps you need a reminder of events in the immediate past. Following the recent shooting in Arizona there was blame placed upon talk radio and members of the media accompanied by calls for restrictions on speech by public officials. Speech, not just guns was blamed for the actions of a lone criminal. Are you still inclined to make arguments about "reasonable" restrictions for firearms?

My point in all this is to show those of you who think going after one essential liberty can be done with out opening the door to assault other freedoms is a grave error in judgment. You are playing with fire. The 2nd amendment is not something you can apply a subjective filter to without setting a precedent for the same arguments to be used against your treasured rights.

Pragmatic justifications for restrictions on Constitutional liberty seems like such a wonderful idea until it makes sense for someone to come after your rights.

Natural Resources and the Public Estate

2011-03-09T20:23:00.000-08:00

“The people have a right to clean air, pure water, and to the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic values of the environment. Pennsylvania's public natural resources are the common property of all the people, including generations yet to come. As trustee of these resources, the Commonwealth shall conserve and maintain them for the benefit of all the people.” - Pennsylvania Constitution, Article 1, Section 27

Most people in Pennsylvania have resigned themselves to the fact that the gas companies are here to stay and there is nothing we can do about it. Every day as I see the increasing amount of trucks making their way down Rt. 664 here in Clinton County I am reminded of this reality and the expanding impact it will have on those of us living here over the next few years. However, as much as these drilling companies and their executives try to make us feel like they are part of the community I can't shake the feeling that we are being hustled.

In our Constitution, it says that public natural resources are the common property of all the people and that the “Commonwealth shall conserve and maintain them for the benefit of all the people”. I simply do not see the policies of our current government falling in line with that idea.

Now, we are all familiar with the “jobs” mantra that is hauled out in front of any criticism of the natural gas industry, and I certainly know it has benefited some of the people, but is it really benefiting “all” the people as our Constitution says it should? If the gas is a resource that is meant to benefit all of us, then I must ask, how much is being shipped out of state and even out of country and how much of those profits are coming back to the people of this state to whom the gas belongs? Also, I find myself asking what tangible net benefit are the people of this area receiving as a result of the Commonwealth and its handling of our public resources? After attending various township and commissioner meetings, I would have to say those benefits are slim to none and they certainly don't outweigh the negative effects on the quality of life for many of us.

Before I moved out here one of the things I enjoyed while visiting Clinton County was the vast areas of wilderness to explore. When we decided to make this our home I looked forward to living so close to wild natural areas. Now when I venture out I encounter truck traffic that rivals Interstate 80 and find the beautiful state forest roads are lined with gas wells. It seems painfully ironic that we advertise our region as the "Pennsylvania Wilds" to bring in tourism while we destroy the natural and “esthetic” beauty that is meant to attract visitors to this area. It is not only frustrating to watch but heartbreaking as someone who loves and enjoys nature.

All of the above excludes the environmental risks we are taking “for generations to come”. When you consider that we have tolerated so many unknown factors into how we are regulating the gas industry it lays upon us a burden to consider our actions...or inaction...and question with due diligence the price we are willing to make future generations pay for our current energy needs.

I realize that I am channeling a bit of Don Quixote, but, if you would, indulge me at tilting one more windmill I would like to share a quote from a children's book that I read to my girls before I put them to bed the other night. It's from the Dr. Suess book titled “The Lorax”...

“But now,” says the Once-ler,
“Now that you're here,
the word of the Lorax seems perfectly clear.
UNLESS someone like you
cares a whole awful lot,
nothing is going to get better.
It's not.

Debt Free Money: The Path Back To American Independence

2011-01-23T11:59:00.000-08:00

“I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity… is but swindling futurity on a large scale.“ – Thomas Jefferson Letter to John Taylor (28 May 1816)

Since the founding of this nation a fierce battle has been waged for control of its money. One of the most heated debates in the Continental Congress was over the establishment of a private central bank. Patriots like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson found themselves at odds with men like our first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, who strongly advocated a private central bank charted by the newly founded United States government.

In 1791 the bankers got their way and the first of a series of privately run central banks were charted by Congress. Each of these met with failure and in 1828 newly elected President Andrew Jackson recognized the danger that his predecessor Thomas Jefferson had foreseen and began to dismantle the central banking system. When the bankers utilized their control of the money supply to cause a depression in response to President Jackson’s efforts, Old Hickory declared, “You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the grace of the Eternal God, will rout you out..” And so he did; the people were given back the power to control their money.

The country prospered under this system until the Coinage Act of 1873, also known as the Crime of ’73. This act demonetized silver and set gold as the standard for currency. This folly is a great lesson to those those who advocate the return to a gold standard as a solution to our current monetary problems. This once again limited the availability of currency for trade which benefited the rich, caused unemployment, and began what is known as the “Long Depression”. The bankers, having wreaked havoc on the U.S. Economy, were now poised for their next attempt to seize control of America’s money.

In 1913, despite our long history of failure with private central banking, the Federal Reserve Bank was chartered by President Woodrow Wilson via the Federal Reserve Act. This put the issuance of U.S. Currency directly into the hands of private bankers. Since then, every U.S. Dollar that is printed has interest bearing debt attached to it that we must pay back through taxation. It is no surprise that in that same year the IRS was created to collect on this interest that we now owe to the private Federal Reserve for loaning us money secured by national debt.

The way our current banking system works is called “fractional reserve banking”. This system allows banks to buy U.S. Treasury Bonds(debt) and lend out more money than they have by obtaining it from the Federal Reserve. Because our money is created by debt this means that every dollar printed will be worth less than the one before. Banks have the ability to control the U.S. Economy through inflation and deflation by manipulating the money supply. These decisions to inflate and deflate our dollar are made by private interests with no accountability to our elected officials; we the people have no say and are at the mercy of whoever controls the private Federal Reserve Bank.

When this system falters like it did in 2008 the banks simply print more money further increasing the national debt and restrict lending to control the amount of currency available to the general public. This causes unemployment and economic depression. Those burdened by debt when this happens lose their property to the banks at a fraction of its value. In other words, they are too big to fail…but you and I are not.

So how do we correct this problem and put the power back into the hands of the people? Well, its quite simple. We follow the example of President Andrew Jackson and rout out these thieves. We abolish the Federal Reserve and allow Congress to issue our money, debt free, and spend it directly into circulation taking control of our own currency which will allow the wealth of this nation to be aggregated equally among the people, not into the hands of the few.

Any form of money is controlled by someone. Using the gold standard will only benefit the rich. Private central banking benefits the bankers. The value of money is determined by its quantity. In a democratic society, that quantity should be controlled by the people through their elected representatives. We the people should be the only thing in this country “too big to fail”.

Laws Of Injustice

2011-01-22T23:05:00.000-08:00

The rule of law exists to provide the individual with justice in a civil society. It is the cement that holds our civilization together and when it is corrupted that civilization crumbles into ruin.

It is to preserve our rights and our property that free individuals come together to form government and make laws. Law is the binding force of the contract we make with one another to protect our freedom. When those laws abridge the liberty of the individual and become prohibitive of acts that bear no influence upon the freedom of others those laws do not represent justice nor do they fulfill the purpose of law in free society.

The knee jerk reaction to any tragedy is to take action. Some within our government feel any horrible event that occurs is grounds to make new laws. They feed on the fear of the citizenry and rise to the occasion offering solutions to protect the people. These solutions often take the form of new laws that restrict a freedom or right in some way. Slowly, but surely, tragic event after tragic event they eat up more and more of our liberty until they have engorged themselves with power while solving nothing but their own desire for political prestige.

They do this by blaming inanimate objects like guns or drugs. When the laws they enact fail to fix the problem they come to us and ask for new laws or more funding to fight “crime”. Meanwhile, crime becomes worse and we become less free and yet few too many of us scratch our heads and ask why.

Prohibitive laws by government upon the actions of the people where there is no victim serve only to create a larger criminal element within a society. This breeds more violence and more crime which fuels the vicious cycle of knee jerk responses by people and politicians which in turn creates more restrictive laws that take away even more freedom.

The greatest lesson we have of this in modern time is the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act enacted in 1920. The public was led to believe that alcohol was the cause of violence and crime and needed to be banned. What resulted was a skyrocketing crime rate and mob violence that rocked every major city in America. Eventually, enough people came to their senses and the 18th amendment was repealed and alcohol became legal once again.

“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it,” or so the famous saying goes. Yet we see examples of our government up to the same old tricks today as if they had not learned the lessons of the past. The government tells us they need to protect us from terrorism so they violate our loved ones while we travel; they tell us they need to stop gun violence so they take guns from law abiding citizens and restrict our right to bear arms; they tell us they need to stop inner city crime so they arrest a young black man with no prior criminal record for possession of marijuana and destroy his life forever.

Does this make sense to you? Does this make sense to anyone?

To restore order and preserve our liberty we as a people must cease reacting to singular events trumped up by a voracious media hungry for ratings and stop listening to politicians that feed on fear and tragedy to gain power for themselves. We have to come to the realization that making others less free does not protect us or our families. Each of us must come to the same conclusion as that great American who surmised that those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither.

The Consent of the Governed

2010-11-27T05:19:00.000-08:00

"...That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,..."
-Declaration of Independence

The power government has over your life is not there by chance or whim. It is not the result of some dark and mystical force that grants some men power over others. It is either by choice or abdication that any man is ruled by tyranny.

Any government, even those ruled by dictators only exist with the consent of those they govern. That consent may be extracted through fear or manipulation but regardless of the method a tyrant must always maintain the consent of his subjects. The greatest threat to any form of totalitarian regime is not an outside military force, but an awakening of the populace to their rightful place of self governance.

Government is not an entity unto itself or an ordained institution, it is a contract between individuals to preserve their rights and property. Any time a government ceases to preserve the rights of the individual it becomes an enemy to its people and must be altered or abolished.

We now live in a state where our government is encroaching too far and has overstepped its granted authority to perform its duty. It is up to us whether we will allow further violations of individual liberty or deny them the power they derive from us.

Thomas Jefferson once wrote, “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” All around me I see fear...fear that if you do not comply with unlawful orders from law enforcement you may be arrested...fear that if you do not pay unreasonable taxes you will be imprisoned... fear that if you speak up you may become the target of some government investigation. Fear is all around us and it is influencing the extent which we are willing to go to take hold of what is rightfully ours.

The solution to our problems in this country or in any nation is quite simple yet impossible for some. The power our government holds is our own and granted only by permission. We need but to revoke our consent.

So, what are you waiting for?

Liberty versus Christian Morality

2010-11-20T04:54:00.000-08:00

One of the biggest problems within the liberty movement is the giant hurdle we approach when it comes to reconciling a libertarian message with the message of the Bible and Christianity; more precisely, the view of Christian conservatives with regard to government policy. When it comes to gay rights, drug legalization, or other tough issues the religious right seems unbending in its resolve to trample on the rights of others who may not share their beliefs.

Christians tend to see the libertarian platform as a threat to their faith or too “liberal” for their taste. Personally, I see the interference with another person’s right to make their own choices as not only anti-Christian but an affront to the very principles which Christian theology claims to teach.

It was Jesus himself that said to “render unto Caesar” implying that Jesus himself has a non-interventionist approach when it came to meddling in the affairs of government. In fact, many expected Christ to be a political hero that would destroy the Roman Empire, but he had a much different idea.

One of the most basic and universal beliefs in Christianity is that God created us with free will. He wants us to choose Him willingly and does not wish to force us into doing His bidding. So, when God himself is not willing to enact force upon us, how then can Christians justify enacting force upon others through the government when it comes to things like gay marriage? When their own God is not willing to compel others into submission by force, how then do Christians think it proper to take such a course of action?

The very first of the 10 Commandments is “You shall have no other gods before me.” Well, when you take it upon yourself through the strong arm of government to force others to comply with your moral code you are setting yourself up in a position to become a god. You are dictating to others restrictions upon their behavior which by Nature’s law God himself does not impose. You are breaking the very first of the commandments and replacing God with yourself and your government.

A truly Christian approach to government would be to allow all men and women to exist in their natural state of liberty, free to make their own choices as long as they do not interfere with the liberties of their fellow individuals. This is not about asking anyone to approve of the actions of others but to simply respect the natural state of liberty which was granted to them by their Creator.

If viewed properly it is my assertion that the libertarian message is not in conflict with Christian morality but rather an extension of their Creator’s design for man: free will and the right to determine his own course of action without coercion or force. If God sees fit to act in this way who are we to question Him? Do the Christian conservatives who seek to impose their moral beliefs on others by law know better than their own God?

The Lie of Privilege

2010-11-17T22:22:00.000-08:00

I am seeing a lot of attention brought forth on the subject of the TSA and the illegal searches being performed at our airports. I am deeply disturbed by some of the stories I am reading and would like to present some of my own thoughts on the matter.

As enticing as it may seem to sacrifice your liberty to feel more secure it is historically the downfall of freedom in a society. When you must violate the liberty which the security is intended to preserve the measure is counterproductive to its stated intent.

There will always be terrorists and evil men that wish to harm us and our families, but trading an Islamic terrorist for a federally funded terrorist who has the authority to violate your 4th amendment rights is ludicrous.

The right to travel is an enumerated right that is a basic human right not a privilege. It also has Supreme Court precedence.

“The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 579.

Flying is not a privilege, it is a right, just as driving a vehicle on a public street is a right. The government does not have the authority to intrude upon that right and deny a citizens right to transportation while violating established liberties clearly defined in our Constitution.

The “privilege” argument is one that is used by statists to strip away your rights and dissolve liberty with corrosive policies. The 9th amendment clearly states, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” This means that just because a right is not expressly listed in the Constitution it does not mean that it is not a right. There is no such thing as a privilege as far as the government is concerned, only the authority to perform its Constitutional duty.

Don’t let our government make you a subject. Stand up for your rights.

Breaking the Cycle

2010-10-28T00:47:00.000-07:00

I watched a re-run of Star Trek: The Next Generation a while back. In this particular episode the crew of the Enterprise-D finds itself stuck in a time loop which culminates in the destruction of the ship and the death of everyone on board. With every iteration a feeling of deja vu comes over the crew and they begin to sense that something is wrong. Eventually, they discover that they are stuck in a repetitive loop and find a way to send a message through to the next loop and they break free.

Oftentimes my nerdy obsession with science fiction is just a diversion but this episode inspired an allegorical comparison to something quite practical.

Two centuries ago British historian Alexander Tytler made the observation that a cycle exists by which free societies regress back ward into a state of tyranny. He attributed the cause of this decline to the apathy created by the comforts of a safe and free environment. This cycle of liberty and tyranny is often referred to as the Tytler cycle.

Looking back into the past we see echoes of these iterations and can see where we are headed as a society by observing the past as Tylter did. We have cycled through this process so many times that we know where we are headed. Inevitable destruction is coming if we do not find a way to break out of this cycle.

We are faced with a choice as a people and a nation: we will either heed the warnings of the past and correct our course or continue down the path to obliteration and become another cautionary tale in a long list of historical lessons.

The real question is can our common sense overcome the apathy created by living in the comforts of our modern free society? Will we sit by as the Romans did and enjoy our sport and our wine while the Republic crumbles around us or will we awaken and take a hold of our destiny and forge a path to greater liberty?

I do not present my thoughts in a manner of condemnation to my fellow citizens but as an honest query to ascertain the direction we wish to take. The path of least resistance is the clear destruction of all we value…there is no doubt that when viewed in the context of historical evidence our liberty and our free nation will cease to exist if we do nothing. It is up to us whether we will break the cycle or further establish it as a natural law to which we are eternally bound.

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” – Thomas Jefferson

The Elephant in the Room: Gun Rights and Urban Violence

2010-10-22T20:47:00.000-07:00

As a gun owner and a 2nd amendment advocate I am well aware of the battle going on in this state over the issue of gun rights. Particularly, the disconnect between the rural communities and urban centers regarding the issue of drug and gang related gun violence.

Up until this point in the debate over gun control the arguments have been dichotomous and confrontational between those arguing for less restriction and more liberty versus those arguing for more restriction and control of gun sales.

Gun owners and those that support less restrictive laws on gun ownership and the right to carry frame their argument based on Constitutional liberty and common sense but they stop short of offering real solutions to the ongoing epidemic of drug and gang related violence that plagues cities like Philadelphia. Conversely, the politicians from areas that have these problems assault the liberties of all citizens in this state without offering a workable solution to the problems they face. Meanwhile, lives continue to be cut short while the debate rages on between the two sides.

To find a lasting solution we must first look at the root of the problem. Most violent crime in population centers is drug related. The trafficking of illegal drugs by street gangs and criminals creates an environment where violence thrives and perpetuates the culture of violence among the poor neighborhoods where the idea of making a quick buck by becoming a drug dealer becomes enticing and due to the criminal nature of that activity often leads to turf wars and violent exchanges between rivals in the drug trade. Police resources are then spent fighting a war they will never win while things continue a downward spiral into more death and violence.

Further burdening our law enforcement is the prosecution of non-violent offenders who are caught buying or using illegal drugs. To try and combat the unending tide of drugs coming into our cities tough laws have been enacted to go after anyone and everyone involved in the illegal trafficking of drugs, but here we are in 2010 forty years after the War on Drugs began and our problems are worse, not better.

As someone who values their freedom I realize that I cannot turn a blind eye to the problem of urban gun violence. To end the assaults on our liberty we must reach out to the leaders in cities like Philadelphia and Pittsburgh to help them solve this problem with rational thinking and an open mind.

My solution to the problem is to make people finally realize that drug prohibition simply does not work and is the root cause of the violence in our inner cities. If we decriminalize drug use and legalize some lesser drugs like Marijuana we will take the criminal element out of the drug trade. We can offer a viable alternative to turn a criminal enterprise into a legal, taxable business which creates jobs and brings in revenue for the cities and the state. At the same time, the resources being wasted arresting and prosecuting the non-violent drug users can be focused on the violent crime that deserves their attention. Money saved from stopping the war on drugs can be reinvested into the community and rehab programs to treat drug abuse rather than criminalize those who seek help with addiction problems. By doing this the violence created by prohibition will be replaced by a peaceful economic industry operating in the open free of the criminal element.

I would call on our state and local leaders to take an honest look at solving the problems in this state resulting from drug related gun violence in urban centers and put aside their differences to do what is right for gun owners and for our cities.

It is time to get off of our soap boxes and stop shouting about the Constitution and start working together for real solutions to the problems in cities like Philadelphia. We have to realize that if we want to preserve our liberties as gun owners we have to take an active part in helping to solve the problems related to gun violence.

The True Nature of Your Liberty

2010-10-09T03:57:00.000-07:00

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

There is such beauty in those words and a simple truth that is often overlooked. In one paragraph we can see the entire purpose for which our ancestors rose up and made themselves free men and the thinking that influenced the inception of the greatest nation the world has ever seen.

The founding of the United States of America was not the end of a story nor was it the beginning of one. It is but a moment in the history of man where we glimpsed just a piece of a greater picture; perhaps a bigger piece than any previous generations had the privilege to see.

Our Declaration of Independence and Constitution are not the sole benchmarks for the definition of liberty; they are guideposts that point the way to greater freedom. The ideas that men like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison espoused were not limited to the residents of one land but were a creed for all mankind.

Liberty is so much more than a list of rights on a piece of parchment. It is a state of being; a way of life. It is waking up every day to a world that has no master and no guidance but the individual passion and desire of every person free to make their own destiny.

A nation can be conquered. A piece of paper can be burned. Government can become corrupt. Liberty can not be destroyed. It is the natural state to which all men and women will strive.

Our rights are not granted to us by anyone and are not guaranteed by a court or by law. Government officials are not the arbiters of freedom and judges are not the representatives of justice. The free will of every person who takes it upon themselves to exist within a state of liberty and through his thoughts and actions pursues a course that leads to a more libertarian society is the true embodiment of freedom and justice.

This is the simple truth that is overlooked in our Constitution: it is we the people who are the government. It is not an entity unto itself; it is a reflection of what we are and is only capable of what we allow it to become. There is no freedom of speech, no right to bear arms, no freedom at all unless we the people seize upon the concept of what liberty means. All of us must comprehend the true nature of our rights, not as they exist in the Constitution, but as they exist within each and every one of us.

Government Steals Newborn Child From Parents

2010-10-08T17:43:00.000-07:00

A disturbing story from New Hampshire as a member of the political association Oath Keepers has his newborn child taken by Child Protective Services. In the video below the father details this horrifying experience.

Below are documents obtained via infowars.com detailing the government's rationale for seizing this newborn from their parents.

As a parent I cannot imagine going through an ordeal like this. I guess when watch lists aren't enough the goons in the government will just take your kids to keep you in line.

Don't Ask, Don't Care

2010-09-23T19:47:00.000-07:00

Traditional values are sometimes a good moral compass to help steady a nation through times of crisis and hardship, but they can also be an excuse to hold on to antiquated prejudices that deny some members of society the equal rights they deserve. So it is with homosexual individuals being discriminated against for their desire to serve this nation with honor.

The policy of don't ask, don't tell is not only absurd but by its very nature a violation of basic civil rights, and now the courts have stepped in to confirm what gay and lesbian activists have been saying for quite some time. Two weeks ago District Court Judge Virginia Phillips had the courage to declare this practice unconstitutional and a violation of the first and fifth amendments.

Unfortunately, President Obama doesn't have the moral courage to take a firm stand on the issue and abolish this practice altogether. He is standing by while Congress debates the issue and is gauging the consequences of allowing gays to openly serve in the military.

I hope that those in power will do the right thing and men and women who wish to give their service to this nation will only have to concern themselves with their ability to serve based on objective standards; not archaic policies of a time gone by.

When it comes to someone's sexual preference and serving in our nation's military the only acceptable policy should be don't ask, don't care.

The Crime of the Camera

2010-09-22T18:19:00.000-07:00

In May of this year libertarian activist George Donnelly was videotaping a fellow activist peacefully protesting in front of a Federal Courthouse in Allentown, PA. He never imagined what exercising his constitutional liberties would cost him.

The footage you see here was deleted by the authorities in an attempt to cover up the truth. It was recovered using open source software.

In my last post I talked about the War on Liberty. This is the kind of behavior that results when we surrender our freedom to feel a little safer. We trade one terrorist for another.

The statement by Mr. Donnelly at the end of this video should speak to us all. What kind of world will we leave our children if we just stand by an let our liberty erode away piece by piece?

It is stories like this that should inspire us to action. I picked the name Mental Brushfire for this blog because I hope that in posting my own words and sharing stories like this I might spark the brushfire of liberty in others. I hope one day that we do not need to be motivated by things like this to preserve our rights. I hope one day this will truly become the land of the free once again.

War On Liberty

2010-09-20T18:42:00.000-07:00

Let me start by asking you a question.

Are you more or less free than you were nine years ago?

Before you answer that let me refresh your memory on some of the events that have occurred over the greater part of the past decade.

After the attacks on September 11, 2001 we all felt a deep sense of loss and a united feeling as Americans against those who struck that deadly blow. In that state of mind our politicians presented us with "solutions" to keep us safe in the future. Still feeling the sting of the recent terrorist attack we sat by as they passed the Patriot Act. This legislation was decried by civil libertarians whose voices were drowned out by the shouts of those demanding justice and safety for their families from the threat of Islamic terrorists.

What we didn't look at was the fine print. We didn't think about the fact that we were giving the F.B.I. the authority to write its own warrants without a judge. We didn't think about how in the name of fighting terrorism we would be allowing the government to spy on its own citizens with warrant-less wiretaps.

The violations of constitutional liberty don't end there. We have detained U.S. citizens without trial or due process. Our President has authorized an assassination on an American citizen. We have tortured prisoners and committed war crimes to meet our goal of keeping the American people safe. When we look at the things done in our name can we dare call these actions patriotic or even American?

It is no wonder with all we have so willingly surrendered we find out that in the name of the War on Terror peaceful groups of protesters have been targeted for surveillance and put on "watch lists". Should we really be surprised?

What makes even less sense is that we are still fighting a war on two fronts that has killed more of our men and women than the terror attacks ever did. The death toll in Iraq and Afghanistan is nearing 7,000. Over 32,500 more young men and women have been wounded or permanently disabled. Compare that to the 2,977 people that died in all the attacks combined on 9/11 and an inquisitive mind begins to ask why we are still fighting this war.

Nineteen men attacked us that fateful day and a fight with a few hundred Al-Qaeda in the desert turned into a global war that has spanned nine years and sees no end in sight. Never forget has become the slogan of those who continue to push the war agenda...well, I say, yes, never forget...never forget the freedom you have lost; never forget the lives of the soldiers who have died and continue to die; above all, never forget that safety cannot be purchased with liberty.

I think it's time we asked ourselves: Has this been a War on Terror or has it been a War on Liberty?

Unexpected Results

2010-09-17T22:35:00.000-07:00

A slight smirk crosses the face of a young man boarding a city bus. As the door closes behind him he finds a seat and settles down into a calm repose. The satisfaction he feels almost hides the the anger and rage just beneath the surface of his otherwise cool complexion.

His thoughts are interrupted as the bus jerks to a stop.

This is it.

This is the place.

He walks slowly down the steps and his feet touch the yellow curb. He walks up the sidewalk a few yards and turns down a narrow footpath which leads to a small courtyard. Around him are groups of young adults talking and reading. In the grass two men are tossing a football back and forth. A pretty girl walks by and for a moment he thinks she recognizes him until she passes her gaze onto some friends behind him and lets out a bit of laughter in greeting.

Suddenly, like boiling water the rage begins to rise within him.

This is what he came to do.

Reaching into his pants underneath a dark gray hoodie he pulls out a gun. Spinning around he aims it at the girl and her friends. A strange sort of euphoria comes over him and the thrill of what he is about to do overtakes his senses. Slowly he squeezes his index finger on the trigger.

In that moment screams burst out from those who see what is about to happen. A sadistic smile forms on his face as he prepares to carry out his grim task...

A single gunshot is heard.

A slight pause and then a realization.

He hadn't fired his gun.

His free hand instinctively pulls to his chest and the dark red color of arterial blood soaks into his shirt. Turning to look behind him he see the face of a man staring at him with cold eyes and a blank expression. Bewildered, he sees the man holding a gun pointed at him.

A bitter laugh at the onset of his last breath comes up short in his throat and he slumps to the ground. The last thought in his mind is confusion mixed with surprise.

"No one was supposed to have a gun here...except me."

Are You A Terrorist?

2010-09-16T19:57:00.000-07:00

This week Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell has said he was "appalled" by the fact that peaceful protest groups were being tracked within the state as part of the War on Terror. Orwellian is the only word I can come up with that best describes this unconstitutional foray into the lives of law abiding Americans. This goes much deeper and is far more unsettling if you dig a little further into the story. The group that was responsible for spying on private citizens is the Institute of Terrorism and Research Response, a private firm which is based in both Philadelphia and Israel.

Among those targeted were protesters opposed to drilling the Marcellus Shale, animal rights activists, tea parties, lesbian and gay protesters, and peace activists. Most frightening of all is that our government is paying mercenary groups to spy on private citizens who pose no threat at all to national security. To add insult to injury the information was not only gathered on individuals and groups but was also distributed to law enforcement and private individuals.

As if it couldn't get worse an email has been uncovered sent by the director of PA Homeland Security addressed to pro-drilling interests involved in the Marcellus Shale in which he is collaborating to share information. Yes, you heard right...the government was giving out information obtained from illegally spying on its citizens to private interests. (read more here)

Do the people of this country need to be afraid to speak out peacefully against their government for fear of being put on some secret watch list? Who else might they consider a threat? These actions are a serious breech of our liberty and a violation against the people of this state. Every one of us should take action to make sure this type of domestic spying does not happen again.

Wake up America...

The Question

2010-09-13T02:54:00.000-07:00

The low sound of trumpets gently falls upon the late summer air as uniformed men respectfully hand a folded American flag to a young woman whose tears fall down and soak the sacred cloth. Her son, only five years old, reaches out to hold his mother's arm. With a single tear falling down his right cheek he looks at her and without hearing his voice she see the question his hurting eyes beg to ask. She answers him only with an embrace of shared loss and pain and finds herself asking the very same question she saw written upon his face.

In a market square the sound of business fills the air and people go about their daily routine. A young man and his friends turn the corner talking and enjoying each others company. Without warning the young man hits the ground thrown by the force of a nearby explosion. He manages to gather his wits after a moment and to his amazement he seems unharmed. Looking around quickly he sees that not all were so fortunate. He struggles to compose himself as he looks upon the mangled remains of two of his companions. Primal cries of sadness jolt his senses and as he looks at the carnage around him his face is painted with a singular question.

Somewhere in the desert a young girl retrieves some water from the local well. In the distance there is the sound of gunfire and fighting but she has grown accustomed to it by now. She walks back the road to her village singing quietly to herself as she goes. Approaching her destination, she sees her mother tending some livestock and her father sitting quietly next to the door of their small house. As she gets closer she see her younger brother playing with some friends off to one side. The sound of jet engines pierce the afternoon air and in moments the view in front of the young girl is blinded with flashes of light and explosions. Dust clouds her vision for a few moments and as it clears she no longer sees her home or her family but a series of craters smoldering with wreckage. A sharp pain hits her squarely in the chest and as she stands upon the path to nowhere her face begs a question.

Do you have the answer?

Gay Rights and the Myth of the Christian Nation

2010-09-12T16:13:00.000-07:00

I hear a lot from religious folks about this country being founded as a Christian nation. They often throw out this rhetoric when arguing for some archaic policy that protrudes upon the rights of others. Well, perhaps they need to read what I am about to share with you.

The following is part of a treaty approved by President George Washington and under President John Adams was unanimously ratified with no objection:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." - Treaty of Tripoli Article 11 (1797)

We are not a Christian nation...we are a free nation where all people may exercise their rights to believe whatever they so choose. This is not to demonize any particular religion including Christianity but rather to put into context the political value of religion in regards to those who founded this Republic.

The argument against gay marriage is fine if you are stating a case for your personal beliefs, but using the strong arm of government to deny equal protection to others who do not share your convictions or moral philosophy is an affront to the idea of liberty and justice for all.

You may condemn the behavior of others and you may state your disapproval but you do not have the right to suppress the choices of others based on your opinion or religious beliefs.

Another common argument I hear from the same crowd is a classic straw man fallacy of the slippery slope into moral decay. They say that if we allow homosexuals to marry today people will be asking to marry their dog tomorrow. This is ridiculous and absurd and not to mention fear mongering nonsense.

Pursuit of happiness is one of the basic rights mentioned in our Declaration of Independence. If someone finds happiness with a member of the same sex it is not our place to deny them the full rights and privileges of a heterosexual couple as far as the state is concerned.

Notwithstanding, I do not think that the government should be involved in the sanctioning of any personal relationship. Our lives and who we choose to enjoy them with are our business and should remain private. If two people desire the legality of a contract let them sign one between each other. If marriage is ordained by God then let it remain is his place of residence.

With all the turmoil and war going on right now I think there are perhaps greater things to worry about than what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms or who they choose to love and share their lives with. If you cannot open your mind to understand homosexuals then do the next best thing and mind your own business.

"Our particular principles of religion are a subject of accountability to God alone. I inquire after no man's, and trouble none with mine." --Thomas Jefferson

The Hypocrisy of the Intolerant

2010-09-10T21:30:00.000-07:00

If you asked me if I thought someone should be allowed to express racism or bigotry I would be first in line to defend their liberty. If you asked me to attend a meeting and listen to their intolerant rants I would flatly refuse. Respecting someone's right does not mean you have to condone their actions or their speech.

We are all familiar by now with Pastor Terry Jones who wants to burn a copy of the Koran. Now others have come forward and stated that they will burn Korans as well. In Afghanistan you have Muslims up in arms chanting, “Death to America” and burning our flag. Meanwhile, I sit here at my computer in sad astonishment at the actions of my fellow countrymen and the inexcusable behavior of Muslim protesters.

If any dare to suggest that these actions are wrong and a bad idea it is viewed as an attempt to quell free speech. Well, I for one completely support your right to be an idiot; just don't expect me not to express my free speech in protest of the irresponsible behavior being displayed.

What astounds me most of all in this rancorous debate is that people so intolerant to the religious practices of others would dare cry for tolerance while flagrantly disrespecting the symbol of another's faith.

Maybe our friends at the Dove World Outreach Center could take a page from the book of Heartsong Church in Memphis, TN who instead of torching a Koran extended a warm welcome to their new Muslim neighbors.

Perhaps if people were to put down their torches and pitchforks and looked honestly at their behavior they might find room to understand each other a little better and discover more constructive ways to bridge the cultural divide.

This 9/11 let's choose to end the cycle of violence. We do dishonor to those who died if we use their deaths as an excuse to ferment hatred against an entire group of people and promote bigotry. Let's not hide behind the 1st amendment and excuse this intolerance; let's honor the true American spirit and open our arms to all without regard to their religious faith and show respect for each other despite our differences.

Liberty and Justice For All

2010-09-03T23:14:00.000-07:00

Our collective history as human beings has never been a shining example of the better qualities in man. Wars and violence haunt us and ever threaten the dreams of peaceful men. In all our failings, though, a spark has always existed to bring hope for the future and guide us onward to better times.

Those who came before us were no greater than any one of us. They were imperfect men and women striving to create a better world for themselves and their children. They left us with ideas and inventions and paved the way for our modern civilization. They gave us the rule of law and the concept of individual liberty.

As Lincoln said, "...our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." Unfortunately, they brought with them slavery, genocide, and war as well. It is a great irony and a testament to the conflicted nature of our struggle to be free.

Looking back we must not condemn our ancestors for their shortcomings because we are them and they are us. Every generation has the same potential for good and evil. We must also refrain from nostalgia and look honestly at our past, present, and future. Liberty is not just an idea to be revered for its past glory; it is the very heart and soul of every good man with its final goal yet to be achieved.

We have been left a legacy binding us not to our past but intended to push us further onward to greatness and destiny. Freedom and liberty for all men and no less should be our heart's desire. It should not be enough for us to restore the hopes and dreams of the past or to re-establish what has once been. We can and must do better than those before us. For though we too are imperfect , we are not incapable of continuing the work undone.

Do not limit what we can be to the ideas of the past, blaze a new trail of creative and independent thought. Our Forefathers conceived this nation in liberty...let us conceive a world bathed in the glorious light of our fair lady. Let us not again cry liberty and justice for all until all men are free.

Who Needs A Gun?

2010-08-19T05:38:00.000-07:00

I was out with my family last night and some people noticed my firearm. An older gentleman made a comment that he never needed a gun and would never need a gun. I kindly spoke with him and asked how quickly the police would show up if he needed protection. He admitted that they would likely not show up in time. In fact, they have no legal obligation to protect you according to our judicial system. If this is the case why are people so apprehensive about law abiding citizens carrying a means to defend themselves?

The common question I see on the faces of people who happen to notice my firearm is one of puzzlement mixed with contempt. They simply do not see the reason why I feel the need to carry a gun wherever I go. Why do you need a gun at a park? Why do you need a gun at the grocery store? Why do you need a gun at all?

Now some of you reading this might just agree with those thoughts. Why does someone need a gun? Well, my answer is quite simple: we likely don't. Most of the time there is no reason to carry a gun. In fact, statistically an overwhelming majority of the time I don't need a gun.

So, now that we have established that fact I think I will disarm myself, hop in my time machine back to October 16, 1991, visit a place called Luby's Cafeteria and sit down for a bite to eat. I feel comfortable in the fact that I more than likely do not need my firearm. Little do I know that a crazed madman is about to drive his truck through the wall next to me, get out, and start shooting patrons. I had no idea that I would be among the 23 dead but, hey, who needs a gun in a restaurant?

Well, let's raise me from the dead and hop back in that time machine and visit the year 2007. Our destination is Virgina Polytechnic Institute and being that its a college campus I am absolutely positive that I am not going to need a gun. This is a place of learning not violence. Wait a minute, perhaps someone should have told that to the young Asian man I see walking toward me with guns blazing. 32 dead...I guess they didn't need guns. After all, someone could get hurt.

These are just some of the most horrific tragedies, but there are many more examples you can find if you simply turn on the 6 o'clock news every night. We like to feel safe and no rational person wishes to invite danger but the truth is that we live in a world where not all of us are good guys.

No one knows when bad things will happen they can only prepare. The chances that I will need my gun to defend the lives of me and my family are slim. You are most likely right when you say there is no need for me to carry a firearm into a park or to a library or to a church. But I will gladly bear your contempt for all the times I will not need my gun for the one rare chance that I do so that if that unfortunate occurrence takes place I will not have to live the rest of my life with the regret that I could have saved the lives of those I love but instead followed your advice and played the odds.

We all value different things in this life. We take steps to keep them safe and secure our investments. We insure our houses and we insure our vehicles but when it comes to the most valuable possession we own we throw caution to the wind and leave it unprotected. When the chips are down and life and death are decided by mere seconds no one will be there to help you. The police will always be there for you, of course, but they won't be there to save you; just to clean up the mess. The only person that can ensure your safety is you. You are your own last line of defense.

The next time you see a man with a gun do not ask him why he needs it; just be glad he doesn't.

Illegals, Liberty, and Snake Oil

2010-08-05T16:10:00.000-07:00

A decaying piece of parchment and a multicolored piece of cloth...that is all our Constitution and flag represent if there is no one left to understand what they mean. Without a comprehension of the philosophy of liberty our founding documents are worthless pieces of paper and our flag is just an empty symbol defined by whatever despot claims it his standard. True patriotism is not the defense of a country or a flag; it is the defense of what they represent.

As Americans we often define ourselves by geography. Many seem to think that the idea of constitutional rights stop at the border or are qualified by citizenship. This stems from the notion that liberty is granted by our government rather than protected by it. The whole idea of essential liberty is that it is not a privilege but a birthright of every person on this earth. Whether you were born in Kansas or Kenya you retain the natural rights of existence.

In reference to the illegal alien problem many are willing to view their fellow human beings as somehow less worthy of the rights they enjoy. The argument for the Arizona law is a disingenuous assault on the 4th amendment and an indicator that we have forgotten the principles of essential liberty as a nation.

There are many options available to us to solve the border problem that do not require throwing out the 4th amendment, including enforcing employment requirements more strictly and putting an end to the war on drugs, but fueled by ignorance and fear people are so quick to trample the very rights that protect them from an over zealous government.

Whenever an essential liberty is infringed upon it is often in the name of some idealistic goal. Those that lay down their rights never initially see it as a threat because they are not the targets. What they fail to see is the precedent that is set by so willingly handing over authority to a government which has no right to claim it. It seems so harmless and innocuous to just give those in power the tools to help secure us and our interests; until they refuse to give up that power and turn it on us.

The Romans learned this lesson the hard way. In a time of turmoil both domestically and abroad they gave authority to Caesar to solve their problems. With the support of the masses he took control of Rome as a dictator. When it came time for him to give that power back he refused which resulted in a violent power struggle and civil war. The great Republic's doom was sealed.

We too are at a crossroads here at home and overseas. Many come to us in the guise of gracious patrons offering to solve our problems. They entice us with “common sense” solutions and an easy way out. Beware them and do not take the political snake oil they peddle. Guard closely at all times every right and turn away any solution that requires the sacrifice of any liberty no matter how small.

Always remember that it is far easier to defend liberty than to fight for it.

“Freedom is a possession of inestimable value.” - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Can You Hear It

2010-08-05T07:59:00.000-07:00

I hear a song. Its words flood me with hope and remind me of all the goodness in this world yet at times it speaks to me with the wordless beauty of inspiration. Not one sound but many intertwined through the air of history resting upon the wind of desire and filled with the passion of restless souls.

It is the sound of agony and delight, pain and pleasure, sorrow and joy. It is the crying of an orphaned child, the crack of a slave master's whip, the screams of the innocent. It is the laughter of a daughter, the first breath of a free man, the battle cry of heroes .

It is the melody of tragedy and the harmony of triumph rising up as a chorus throughout the ages. Though it is loud enough for all to hear few listen, but when they do they remake the course of our destiny and add their own unique voices to the anthem of all who came before. It both stirs my soul and haunts me with the omen of silence.

It is the song of all of us; it is who we are and who we might yet become. Liberty is the song and we are its instruments.

Amor Verus

2010-07-26T02:55:00.000-07:00

There is a light in my life that shines with the strength of a sun. It warms me when the icy chill of a harsh world creeps in and threatens to freeze the humanity in my soul. When I find myself weakened by the rigor of the daily grind it holds me up and gives me the strength to keep going. More than that it holds a love so pure and gentle it sweeps over me like the warm waves of a tropical sea. Many men seek what I have found but do not find it. It has been the thing of legends and epic tales yet it is as simple as the wisdom of a child. It cannot be taken away or stolen from you. Some have stared it in the face and through their foolishness have let it slip through their grasp. Wars have been fought in its name and kingdoms have been toppled by its power. It has shaped so many things in this world and so many individuals great and small. It can be found among the high and stately though you are more likely to find it in the lowest places of stature. It does not favor any person though it finds those more easily who are open to it when it comes along. The unfortunate who have squandered it or have closed their minds to its existence mock it with cynical tone while the few who do find it bask in every moment of its beautiful glow. Of what do I speak? Why true love of course. The love I hold for a person I do not deserve and who, to my great wonder, loves me too. A person with such natural grace and beauty of spirit I am amazed that I can call her...my wife.

A Simple Task

2010-07-23T00:23:00.001-07:00

Somewhere in the muggy heat of night out in the jungle a strange animal calls out. A young man slaps at a mosquito on his neck and adjusts the rifle on his shoulder. As he sits on watch staring out at the empty darkness his thoughts drift to home and his wife and small son. A smile comes to his face; a glimmer of comfort in the hell he now finds himself in. A pop of gunfire stirs the air and all around the night lights up with the red glow of flares and muzzle flashes. The young man stands up to yell for his squad and before the words reach his mouth a single bullet pierces his throat and he slumps down on the ground gasping for air clutching at the sky as if reaching for something that is not there. The horror and realization of his demise writes itself upon his now lifeless face as mortar fire tears whats is left of his body to pieces...

Its Monday night. A man grabs a 12 pack from the cooler at the local six pack shop and drives over to a friend's house to catch the game. They drink and cheer on their team and quote stat after stat and make comments on the bad calls and missed passes. Afterward they slap each other on the back and head home. The next morning seems unimportant. A little hung over and groggy the man heads off to work. After a long day he grabs a beer from the fridge when he gets home and sits down on the couch. When the TV comes on he sees a news man talking about election results and promptly flips the channel. Several months later at work he is notified that his employer is dropping his health insurance due to the new legislation that has passed in Congress. He gets angry and bitches about politicians and never thinks about that Tuesday a few months back when he flipped the channel.

There isn't much that is required of us to make a difference in our country and preserve liberty. Most of us will never have to face the horror of war or pay the ultimate price to preserve the freedom we cherish. The only act that we are called on to do as responsible citizens is take a few hours out of one day every year to pull a lever, push a button, or poke holes in a piece of paper. You don't have to worry about a bomb going off outside the polling place or roaming gangs of thugs killing members of one party or another. All you have to do is get off your ass and walk or drive to a polling place and vote.

As easy as this task seems, 50% of the people in this country do not bother to vote in a presidential election and even fewer vote in off year or local and state elections. Discontent in this country is at an all time high. Approval of Congress sits at a staggering 11% and yet more than half of us will likely sit at home or find some other activity rather than spending the small amount of time it takes to make a difference and send a message to those in power.

Our freedom isn't free. It is paid for in blood; precious blood of fathers, brothers, sons, and daughters....When so many have given so much for you; can you really justify avoiding a simple act that would honor their sacrifice?

With a heartfelt plea I ask anyone reading this to please take the time to read up on the candidates that will be on your ballot this November. Pay attention to what is going on in your local communities and vote for those that will honor the legacy of liberty that has given us the freest country in the history of this world with the hope that it remains that way for future generations.

Support Our Troops: Bring Them Home

2010-07-09T13:26:00.000-07:00

At what point will we stand up and say enough is enough? How many fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, and children must lay down their lives to "free" people who are determined to hate us? I am of course talking about the wars in the Middle East and the fact that after nine years we have more and more of the best this nation has to offer being tossed out as cannon fodder for an agenda set by career politicians who are so inept they can't even correct the course of our economy.

None of us, including myself, had misgivings about going after the people that attacked us on 9-11 and destroying their ability to attack us again, but what took us over there is not why we are still there and not the bill of goods that sold us into supporting a war in the first place. What we are doing is angering the world, playing policeman, and taking it upon ourselves to "nation build". We are not preserving freedom and we are not doing what is best for this nation or the men and women who serve it with honor.

It took us only 4 years to defeat the Nazis and the Japanese and here we stand 9 years later in Afghanistan where 50% of the casualties have occurred in the last 2 years. This is no longer a war in which we can achieve a victory but a slaughterhouse for valuable American lives being sacrificed for the incompetence of our leaders.

I want it to be clear that I fully support our troops and respect them. That is why I am writing this. I cannot stand the thought of another child becoming an orphan or a wife losing her husband to a cause that has no benefit for the ideals that we hold as a nation. I love this country; I love freedom and I strongly believe we should always defend ourselves from any enemy that threatens to infringe upon our liberty, but it is not out place to force others to accept our ideas and bring democracy through the methods of tyrants and empires of the past. Liberty is a seed that must be planted not a rock that must be thrown.

Let us do the right thing and call for an end to to the wasting of valuable American lives. Let us truly support our troops and bring them home.

Reasonable Restrictions

2010-06-29T09:13:00.000-07:00

Monday the Supreme Court ruled against the gun ban in the city of Chicago and declared the right to keep and bear arms for self defense an individual right incorporating the 2nd amendment under the 14th amendment as a protected right. In spite of this ruling and the victory of gun rights activists in the Heller case two years ago, anti-gun politicians continue to seek ways to circumvent our laws and our Constitution to prevent the average citizen from exercising their second amendment rights.

Since the ruling in the Heller case two years ago, Washington D.C. officials have worked very hard to make it as difficult as possible to own a gun. To purchase a gun you must be subject to all kinds of restrictions like fingerprinting, training courses, and even then there are restrictions on the types of guns you can buy. It is clear their intent is not to obey the spirit of the law but seek every avenue possible to enact a defacto ban.

Mayor Daley of Chicago announced in a press release his intent to enact similar measures like those in D.C. to prevent individuals from purchasing firearms. Meanwhile, while crime runs rampant and men like Mr. McDonald seek only the most basic right to defend themselves in a city where the Mayor and the police are unable to do so they are condemned and criminalized themselves. The actions and statements of Daley show not an intent to follow or respect our rule of law but rather a defiance and a refusal to acknowledge a protected right and actively pursue policies to violate that right and deny law abiding citizens their natural and essential liberty to defend themselves.

In his dissenting opinion Justice Stevens stated the following:

“The practical impact of various gun-control measures may be highly controversial, but this basic insight should not be. The idea that deadly weapons pose a distinctive threat to the social order—and that reasonable restrictions on their usage therefore impose an acceptable burden on one’s personal liberty—is as old as the Republic.“

So, what is a reasonable restriction then? Is it limiting the ability for the average person to purchase a firearm so severely that it makes the prospect of ownership so daunting that people refrain from even bothering? Is it making gun ownership prohibitive through costs and fees so that it becomes more and more difficult for those with limited resources to retain their right to keep and bear arms? It seems to me like Justice Stevens and many of those who agree with his position are trying to talk out of both sides of their mouth paying lip service to the 2nd amendment and the individual right to self defense while encouraging policies that would make it impossible for most of us to exercise that liberty.

Nothing

2010-06-03T00:14:00.000-07:00

A cold draft blows in on you. A slow drip of water fills the silence like a great waterfall. Nothing...you feel nothing. Numbness overcame the feelings of cold and wet long ago. The dreams are the same every night. It was the night they came. Screams echo in your mind bouncing off the shattered remains of a soul. As hard as you try the silent void pulls in your consciousness and you struggle not to think, but the memories will not be abated and they fill your imagination with the vivid reality of a past that stalks you relentlessly.

It was not a night unlike any other. You sat on the couch with your wife while the kids slept upstairs. The news had been filled with stories of violence and threats of war but it seemed so far away. The government had been taking steps to control things but they were failing and several cities were in complete chaos. You casually turn off the TV and leaned into your wife as knocking was heard from the front door. You opened the door and a camouflaged Hum V was sitting out in the street, in fact a few others were parked in front of homes up and down the road. The sound of your name catches your attention and you reply with a confirmation which identifies you to the young soldier standing in your doorway. "You will come with me, sir." As you are loaded into the back of the vehicle you see your family being detained and everything fades into the evening twilight while a faint pop of gunfire catches your ear.

A bright light shines down on you as you are seated in a metal folding chair. A tough looking man asks you questions about political affiliation and religious beliefs. Stunned and bewildered you answer them and pray for this to be over soon. That's all you can do now. The news reports come back to your memory about civil unrest and the anger of mobs demanding justice from the government for violating their rights. It all seemed so far away. You didn't really care for all that political nonsense.

Out of the chair now and being led down a long hallway where a makeshift cell waits you in what turns out to be a local elementary school classroom. Others crowd in around and inquires fly back and forth as to the nature of what is happening. Too dazed to think you look around and recognize friends and neighbors. All of them share a similar experience of being interrogated and not understanding what has happened. A young man in the back of the room speaks up, "They are gathering up potential insurgents because of the threats to overthrow the government. I heard it on the radio right before the station went dead." A thick cloud of revelation settles in the room and a muted panic fills the eyes of every person there. You wonder what could have possibly made you a threat. You didn't even vote. You were registered but never really had time to deal with political bullshit so it was out of sight and mind. You had owned a few guns but since the government banned most guns a few years back you just had the old shotgun your dad gave you. Yells come from outside the classroom door to get back and it flies open.

A burlap sack drops down over your head and you feel a shove then fall down into the bed of what feels like a truck. After several stops you apparently reach the final destination. You see only faint hues of light as you are prodded on for what seems like an eternity. It gets darker and you feel dampness in the air. A hand reaches down and pulls off the sack. The same hand reaches out and pushes you forward into a dark cell. You have no idea where you are or what happened to your family. You wait for more questions but they never come.

Meals come once a day and you never see the face that brings them to you. All you were; everything and everyone you loved is gone. There is no phone call. There is no hope. There are no answers. Just the cold and the dark. How could this of happened? You never harmed anyone; you obeyed the law. You never even got involved in anything political. You didn't even bother to vote because it seemed pointless. You really didn't do anything. Then it hits you...

Quiet. All is quiet. But that echoing scream fraying the last threads of sanity bellows out in maddening twisted laughter, "I did nothing...NOTHING!" Tears roll down your face and you repeat the phrase until the void is satisfied once again.

Language, Young Man

2010-05-28T00:30:00.000-07:00

Expression through language is one of the most basic skills we have in civilized culture. Words are a primary method of how we communicate and relay information to those around us. What is a word, though? It starts out as an observation. Then the mind forms a precept of the object or idea it sees. The final step is the creation of a concept which results in a series of phonetic sounds coming together to form a word.

There are many unique and different ways which the mind works to express itself. Using adjectives and adverbs we can add color and description to the thoughts we wish to convey. Words can make us laugh, cry, and even make us feel better when we are sad. The motive behind every word is a thought trying to find its way into articulation. It is not so much the word itself that carries meaning but the intent with which it was spoken or written.

This leads me to the topic I wish to discuss: dirty words. In our collective vocabulary there are certain words which can provoke offense from those who hear them uttered. We are taught to avoid such words and not speak them aloud. Most notable of these forbidden words is fuck. No other word has such widespread notoriety in the English dictionary than this one word. By forming the syllable and pronouncing it out loud the speaker immediately gets the shocked attention of those who hear it. This is most commonly followed by looks of indignation and scowls of disapproval. This word causes so much offense to the general public that we have it censored from television and print. But going back to the definition of a word what we are really doing is censoring thought.

“Bad” words are often referred to as expletives in common usage. They are meant to exemplify the thought being expressed but serve no syntactic purpose. For instance, I could say, “I am mad”, “I am really mad”, or I am really fucking mad.” The third example expresses a feeling of anger beyond the other two. I could have just said I was mad but adding the expletive lets you know the level of my anger. Expletives are just one usage of “bad” words, but they can also take the form of nouns and verbs. Look at the word shit. As a noun it means the same thing as excrement, poop, feces dung, etc.; but using shit instead of the other possible words is considered offensive. It is this fact that reveals the hypocrisy and irrational basis for censorship of these words.

If words are just verbal expressions of thought then how can a word by itself be offensive? If words can mean different things and things can be described by different words how is it that we can decide one particular word among those is not acceptable for public usage. If the idea is the same why does it matter which word is used to convey that thought? I have been insulted before by crass individuals who have used so called “bad” words and others that used more “polite” terminology. It did not matter to me the language that was used but rather the intent to insult.

The idea that we can control thought through censorship is ridiculous. The idea that we should control thought at all is frighteningly Orwellian.

The Nature of True Evil

2010-05-26T21:23:00.001-07:00

If I asked you to picture evil in your mind what would you see? I imagine you would picture all the horrible images of war and death placed upon our TV screens daily. Some might even conjure up images of demons and devils tempting men to give in to their baser instincts. Evil takes many faces and shows itself in various forms of human tragedy, but what is true evil? How do we define it?

Many evil men have walked this earth and caused untold damage to the lives of innocent men, women, and children. The motivations for their actions had but one commonality; a binding force that connects the reality of their action with a rational explanation as to its cause: irrational thinking. There was no devil on their shoulder or magical curse upon their soul. All it takes for horrible things to happen in this world is for one person to accept a false premise and build upon that the excuses for all types of unspeakable acts.

Our minds are powerful objects. Without thought our lives would cease to exist. Conscious effort is required to sustain our lives and make them worth living. The value of life is based on our ability to think. Irrationality is an abandonment of the mind as a tool for making decisions and denies it the proper place as a method for survival. The sovereignty of the rational mind is displaced by the notion that some other force knows better than your feeble capacity for thought. Once this is accepted there is no foundation for a proper view of reality. Anything and everything is possible. There is no longer a basis for morality that respects life but instead a morality based in the antithesis to the very existence of man. It is here that all evil is born.

When I was a child I was taught that I was not to do certain things. Raised in the church I was instructed that it was because God said so. To do right and avoid wrong I was not required to think but simply obey. No reason was needed just that it was the right and moral thing to do; there was no basis in rational thought for good behavior just blind obedience. Freedom from doubt and complete surrender of will were the highest levels of piety and holiness. The fatal flaw in this system is that without rational thought and an existential basis for morality the line between good and evil could be drawn by the will of a God who was not be questioned and whose word came from other men. Murder, genocide, tyranny; all could be excused if the person committing them had the favor of a supernatural being and no one could question their actions because it was the will of God. Every single act of evil stems from a philosophy based in this denial of rational thought.

You might think this is an assault on religion. That would be far from correct. Secular forms of thinking have also been guilty of destroying man's mind. Marxism, for instance replaces God with the state; requiring its people to accept the dictates of a disembodied public will in place of the individual capacity to think. There are many religions and philosophies that tear down the mind and in its place put some idealistic principle made to appeal to our good will. They all degrade man and make him an inferior animal who is unable to plot his proper course without the guidance of better men or gods; all while making him think that he is accomplishing the greater good.

From the field of ancient battle to the atrocities of modern war this common thread exists. It has caused many good men to buy into the lies of tyrants and willingly surrender their right to a life that is their own. To truly enslave men and bend them to your will it is not their body you take from them; you steal their mind...and that is the greatest evil of all.

Unimpressed

2010-05-22T23:41:00.000-07:00

Read all the books ever written and gain the wisdom that is attainable from all the collected knowledge of man. Tell me every story of heroic conquest and bravery. Read to me all the speeches of great men and speak their words with the passion that first inspired their utterance. Recall to me the beauty of mountains and the splendor of nature. Show me the sun and the stars and all the wonders this world has to offer. Show me all these things and I will remain disinterested because I just heard four words which shame all the attempts of the universe to impress me. Four simple words that hold all the beauty of existence and the joy of life – Daddy, I love you.

Freedom: All or Nothing

2010-05-22T01:22:00.000-07:00

What does it really mean to defend liberty?

If someone was arrested without a warrant and sentenced without a trial nearly every person reading this would jump up in outrage and seek justice for the victim of such an offense. On the flip side, though, if a neo Nazi was arrested for yelling racial slurs most of you would probably give it little notice and would not be motivated to defend his right to free speech. There are less extreme comparisons that can be found like those on the left of the political spectrum who support the right to free speech yet when it comes to the right to bear arms they are willing to infringe upon others. Conversely, on the right side of the political spectrum there are cries of liberty and freedom and too much government control yet some are willing to deny equal protection to homosexuals and aggressively pursue non violent drug users. Our whole political culture is permeated with conflicting views of those willing to trample on the rights of others while demanding the protection of the rights they hold dear.

Liberty is not just an arbitrary inclination decided by popular sentiment; it is a fixed set of freedoms that all of us possess inherently. The reason that government exists is to preserve those freedoms and it is the responsibility of every one us to make sure that no one is ever the victim of a violation of those rights. You may not agree with someone else and you may find their expressions distasteful but you must stand by them and defend their rights as you would your own.

Let me share a quote with you from John Locke, a philosopher who influenced many of out founding fathers. Read below:

"He that in the state of nature, would take away that freedom, that belongs to anyone in that state, must necessarily be supposed to have a design to take away everything else, that freedom being the foundation of all the rest. As he that in the state of society, would take away the freedom belonging to those of that society or commonwealth, must be supposed to design to take away from them everything else". (Second Treatise, Chapter 3).

What he is saying in plain language is that if someone is willing to take away one freedom it must be assumed that they wish to take away all freedoms. Locke understood that there is no middle ground when it comes to civil liberty; an infringement on one freedom was an infringement on all freedom. If our essential liberties are not absolute then they are subject to the whim of whoever holds the power to take them away. This is why we must be ardent defenders of any encroachment upon our rights or the rights of others.

It is from this vantage point that we see how disparaged the concept of essential liberty has become. We must return to a principled approach of governance and be willing to support every constitutional right with equal vigilance and determination. These reasons are why I define myself as a Libertarian. For me there is no right or left there is only freedom or slavery. There is but one proper cause for political action and that is to make sure we continue to exist in a free society and retain the ability to enjoy our lives free of unnecessary interference from others or our government.

Party or Principle?

2010-05-20T21:37:00.000-07:00

I was never good at sports growing up. At age 12 I had size eleven feet and hadn't quite grown into them so I was always a bit clumsy. That being the case I never won that many games, but my Dad instilled a lesson in me that seems so simple now: It doesn't matter if you win or lose; it matters how you play the game. Now that I am older I look back and find it amazing how such a profound and simple truth can be applied to my life and my ethical beliefs as an adult.

As children things were always so black and white. Don't do this. Don't do that. This is bad. That is good. We always had someone to tell us what was the right thing to do. In the formative years of our adulthood that world of moral absolutes was shattered by a gray and dreary thing called reality. We found that many things aren't cut and dry and some questions don't have answers. In that world we began to believe that compromise and a certain modicum of pragmatism is needed to succeed in life. We became jaded to reflect a world where things just are the way they are and you just have to do what you have to do to survive. So, when that old life lesson of “it's how you play the game” is recalled from memory you politely smile in nostalgic bliss but brush it away as the foolishness of childhood.

For many of us we carry this jaded view of the world into our political beliefs. We see the wisdom in compromise and lay down our principles to achieve a victory because it is better than losing. I had become like this and bought into the idea of acceptable compromise but something happened to me...I looked around and I asked myself if it was worth it. I began to see that for all my talk of right versus left and Republican versus Democrat I was voting and nothing was happening. Things stayed the same and in most cases got worse. It was then that the memory came back to me of the day at that baseball field where I was so frustrated at losing and the words my Dad spoke to me rang back and not just the memory but an understanding of the truth they held: Winning doesn't mean anything if you give up who you are to achieve it.

The corruption of our two party system has become so rotten that we more than often find ourselves voting for what some term the “better of two evils”. Casting your vote for the candidate you can tolerate the most has become the criterion of most voters. Like the rest of the foolish ideas of youth such as principle and ethics we swallow our ideals and give in to the gray blur of practicality. In fact, the depressing idea of having to do this often keeps the majority of us from bothering to vote at all. Meanwhile, corrupt men and women plot and scheme while we just keep swallowing the candidates they give us.

Somewhere in the back of your mind is that memory...it may not be the same as mine, but its there. You remember the simplicity of its truth and the feeling you had when you once believed in it. I ask you to believe in that idea once again. That no matter who they tell us to vote for we will decide who is worthy of our vote. Believe in the foundational principles of essential liberty and limited government and hold every candidate who asks for your vote accountable to them. Do not let party come before principle and do not give in. Let's not just win a political victory but achieve a political victory worthy of who we are.

Enjoy Your Stay

2010-05-19T23:36:00.000-07:00

You open your eyes. You are looking up at the sky and see white clouds scattered across a pale blue background. Something's wrong...you shake your head and look down to see that you are bleeding as the effects of momentary shock wear off. Tilting your head around you see others lying in pools of blood; some crying in pain, others staring up at that same blue sky with lifeless expressions. Memories of recent events flood into your mind and you see the flare of gunfire and the panic of innocent victims running in terror. It was just a short time ago but now seems like a lifetime away as a cold feeling begins to creep under your skin. “My son, my daughter...where are they?!” you scream out in your mind but it comes out as only a gasp barely audible in the ensuing chaos. You try desperately to stand but fall back down and roll slightly to one side and see every member of your family lying quietly next to you. A single tear rolls down your cheek and before you can even feel the first pangs of grief your mind goes blank and the cold feeling envelops you.

What you didn't have time to think of before that last moment are the events that led up to your tragic death. You were at the local elementary school. You were there to pick up your kids with your wife. Walking across the parking lot you were greeted by a teacher and your children ran over to join you. As you exchanged idle conversation with the teacher and your wife, across from you, in the background, some maniac with intentions unknown pulled two semi automatic pistols from a backpack and began firing into a crowd of nearby students. Instinctively, you ducked to the ground trying to grab for your children. You reached for something just then...wait its not there...with sudden horror it dawns on you that you left your gun at home because this was a school and as everyone knows you aren't allowed to have guns there. So, like a good law abiding citizen you voluntarily disarmed to comply with the law and went off to pick up the kids. After all, what could happen? Immediately, after you reached for the non-existent sidearm you began to see the crazed individual turn toward you and begin firing. The teacher was first to go and then as a smile widened across a disturbed face you felt two hammering blows hit you in the chest.

Welcome to a gun free zone. I hope you enjoyed your stay.

Throwing Away Your Vote

2010-05-19T23:34:00.000-07:00

The greatest enemy to our political system in this country is not what you may first think of when you consider the massive mess this country finds itself in. As we look together upon the strewn wreckage of our county we seek desperately to point our finger in the proper direction so we can find who is to blame and hopefully resolve our problems. My dear friends and fellow Americans that finger of blame can find only one resting place and that is pointed directly back at each and every one of us. We have neglected our duty as citizens and fallen asleep at our posts. We have been satisfied to feast upon the prosperity of those who came before us and neglected to sow the seeds for future generations and preserve the heritage left in our hands. We have coddled ourselves with the toys and pleasures of prosperity trading liberty for safety and purchasing security with freedom. We have listened to the song of tyrants repeating the verses they have sung throughout the ages lulling countless souls into complacent slumber while they encage them in a prison built by their own ignorance and fear. It is time to wake up.

Choices are before us that will shape this nation and the world for generations to come. With those choices will come the voices of compromise convincing you to take the wiser path of pragmatism. Those voices are not your friends; they are not wise nor are they good natured; they are the evil that is slowly deconstructing the foundation of essential liberty in this nation. I ask you to look at the position we find ourselves and answer honestly if voting for either party has changed anything. You have been duped into voting for candidates who can supposedly win rather than those who truly represent you. Political power has become the ultimate goal while our Constitution lies in shambles and individual liberty hangs by a thread. The two parties continue to grow more powerful and assert their will through a stronger more overbearing Federal bureaucracy. Limited government has become a meaningless phrase thrown out to placate we who seek real change. At every turn you hear the booming voices echoing their distaste of people like Ron Paul or others like him. The media has become a tool to drown out the voices of dissent with polite ridicule and patronization. Even so called conservative voices argue these points and urge voters away from such "extreme" views and candidates who support them while banking on the fact that you aren't really paying attention to the substance of the debate. In the end, you walk up to that polling booth and you vote, not for the candidate you believe in, but the one they have maneuvered into place to hold onto power; a person beholden to them and their desire to wield the club of government.

Many of us see what I have stated above yet we still fall prey to the game. What is it that causes us to sacrifice our principle and do this every single time? It is the idea of "throwing away" your vote. We have been convinced that the better of two evils is somehow good.; that meeting halfway somehow makes sense to achieve our goals when in reality it just puts them in a better position to move the ball down the field in the opposite direction. After swallowing these" moderate" candidates time after time we must begin to realize we have been surrendering our values piece by piece until only a small amount of what once represented this county remains.

How do we fix this problem you might ask. Well, the answer is quite simple. Stop playing their game. Don't wait for your neighbor to agree with you. Don't settle for a candidate who you don't agree with when there are other options. Don't let them tell you who to vote for. Look for third party candidates or independent candidates who might better suit your views and get behind them. Fight for candidates in party primaries who refuse to tow the party line. Lobby your lawmakers for open primaries and run-off elections. If enough of us follow our conscience, I think we will find we are not as alone in this fight as they would have us believe and we can accomplish much more than they estimate a possibility.

Those Evil Potheads

2010-05-19T23:30:00.000-07:00

It is a late summer evening at the Washington estate on Mt. Vernon. Martha sits quietly across the room as George lights a match and lifts it to a pipe he has rested in the side of his mouth. Out of nowhere, a crashing sound is heard from the front entrance as armed militia enter the room and surround them with weapons aimed. George is then forced to his knees and thrown to the ground as his wife is restrained.

This is not how you would expect a President of the United States to be treated but like many of our founding fathers Mr. Washington was guilty of one of the gravest crimes one can commit in modern society...he was a pot farmer. In fact, cannabis was a major crop in many parts of the colonies in that time. These days it has become the excuse for police nationwide to raid homes, arrest non-violent individuals, invade foreign countries, and use up our hard earned tax money to fund all kinds of police brutality. And after over 40 years since Nixon first coined the phrase "war on drugs" has anything changed?

What makes no sense at all is the fact we have seen in the past that prohibition does not work which is why the 18th amendment banning alcohol was repealed. Yet here we are arresting sick people who use a medicinal herb for pain relief and throwing them in jail along with those who provide them with the product. In addition,our 4th and 5th amendments have been butchered and trampled; all in the name of stopping a menace created by the very act of making this and other drugs illegal.

For almost 200 years marijuana was legal and there was no outcry so why did we decide to ban it?

A movement in the 1930's which resulted in the ban was led by a man named William Randolph Hearst who owned a large amount of newspapers and a large portion of the paper mill industry as well as vast timber acreage to produce paper. Some had begun to use hemp to make a cheaper and better paper which was a threat to his empire. So utilizing a campaign of fear and racism he lobbied with others to ban marijuana and was successful. The very root of all this was greed and power.

I myself do not smoke marijuana but I can plainly see the harm the war on drugs like marijuana is doing to this country. I watched a video on youtube tonight of a man who had a few grams of pot and had SWAT execute a search warrant on his home in the middle of the night killing his two dogs and terrorizing his children. Ask yourself if this the America our forefathers envisioned; if this is the kind of country you want to live in. You may think marijuana is bad and you may think it is unhealthy but if you allow the government to come into someone's home with assault rifles just because he wanted to get high when it poses no threat to anyone... what is to say that someone won't find something you are doing that is harmful or unhealthy and decide to legislate you into a criminal? Don't think its possible? Weren't they just trying to ban salt in New York City?

Of Children, Liberty, and the Right to Bear Arms

2010-05-19T23:28:00.000-07:00

Tonight as I put my girls to bed and they laid their heads down and went to sleep I was struck by a thought that pierced me so deeply I felt the need to put it into words. Often in the realm of political struggle and legal battles to preserve our liberties we discuss philosophy and principle and we offer platitudes suited to further our cause, but in the midst of all our quotations of law, founding fathers, and men of reason we cannot lose sight of what gave men pause to discover the nature of man's rights and the cause which made men run into battle in the name of this notion we call individual liberty. I think, tonight, I saw more clearly than ever the tangible motive that provoked men to challenge kings and tyrants from the times of ancient Egypt to colonial America. It was not wealth or power these men sought; although they did wish to prosper...it was something far simpler and yet something not considered principle in the argument for freedom by many politicians and scholars.

Before I became a father I always talked of liberty and the rights of man but it was purely intellectual. I never really felt such passion as I do now to actively preserve the essential liberties granted to us by nature and secured by our Constitution. When I first held my daughter in my arms my whole world changed. As time passed and another beautiful little girl entered my life I began to ponder on not just the intellectual side of my belief but the reality of how eroded the concept of essential liberty has become in our country and what it might mean for the future of my children.

I often hear the arguments by those who seek to remove more and more freedom that I must think of the children and that we must keep them safe so please, if you will, hand over this right or that right. Then they return a little while later and request with aid of some tragic event if I would not mind handing over another liberty because after all you don't really need that and it would make our job so much easier to keep you and your family safe. Time and again the people of this country buy into that same line of thinking and willingly tighten the noose around our collective necks. Not many stop to think of where these requests will end or what they are giving up until it is too late. As I sit here tonight and feel my heart beating with such pride and love as a father for the two most precious people in the world to me and of my wife who is my life and love I cannot fathom handing their safety and well being over to another. It is this cause and this motive that I believe moved men to first perceive freedom and individual liberty.

In the end of our lives here in this existence what have we but the dirt which holds our remains? What is it that causes us to want to preserve our freedoms which we hold onto for yet a moment? Looking into the kind and innocent eyes of a daughter answers that question for me. Holding my wife and feeling the love I have for my family is what pushes me to action. Liberty should not just be for one generation but for all who follow behind us. It is not an idle task to endure but is a daily battle against those who would turn our emotion and our love of life and family into a cause that would destroy all that we hold dear. Know that the only thing that can keep all we treasure safe from the hands of tyrants and small minded men is the barrel of the gun that you hold pointed in the face of every such evil. Without the ability to protect our loved ones and our families there is no liberty. That is why I fight as passionately as I do for my right to bear arms. The root of my cause is not a love for wood and steel or a fetish for violence...it is and ever will be the endearment of that first glance into the eyes of a new human being that calls me, daddy.

The Battleground of the Next American Revolution

2010-05-19T23:23:00.000-07:00

Many of us have begun to notice that there is something deeply wrong in this country; we see how far off the map this “great experiment” has gone from its intended course. In conversations with others who notice the disparagement there is often talk of revolution and coming conflict with the statists who seek to dominate every part of our lives through an out of control government. There is plenty of rhetoric and passionate statements of patriotism and liberty. We speak of rights and freedom and demand better from our government; we shout down those who disagree and dig in for a fight. We use terms like conservative and liberal without even thinking about what they mean or about the people we are labeling.

One thing is certain: we must return this ship to its original course before we steer too far and cannot come back. Political infighting and mudslinging will not accomplish this. Smearing those who disagree with us will not get us closer to the goal we seek. Make no mistake, there is a battle coming and it will be waged violently, not with weapons of a physical nature, but with ideas and intellect. If we get to the point where we must force our fellow countrymen into submission we might as well surrender now and let this nation dissolve into the oblivion of social tyranny. If we truly want to return to the principles of our founding and preserve freedom and liberty for future generations then we must win the minds and hearts of those who fail to see the importance of preserving our political and philosophical heritage.

Over the past 100 years a disease has crept in amongst us. It started with the flawed German philosophers of the 18th and 19th centuries and grew into a political movement that swept the globe. It arrived on our shores in the form of progressivism, modernly known as "liberalism". This political ideology, rooted in an altruistic philosophy, captured the hearts of those who believed its stated intents. That government could be a force for good under the leadership of proper men of vision; men that could steer society to Utopian bliss. Over the last century using the good nature of generous people they have enacted their changes in ways few have noticed as a threat. Government has grown at an exponential rate and still we see nothing more than failure after failure out of lofty promises and idealistic goals. What so many of us neglect to see is what 100 years of “selfless” charity with government as the benefactor has cost us. We have surrendered the principles that led to such a successful and free nation.

To return this nation to principles of its founding we must understand the philosophy that influenced our forefathers. One of the most influential philosophers that impacted the thinking of those founders was John Locke. He held a belief that in looking into the history of mankind government was never a force for good but a threat to the natural liberties of man. Men like Thomas Jefferson and George Washington viewed government as a “necessary evil” needed to protect the rights of its individual citizens but that it must be limited in its power to prevent abuse. It is this idea which has faded from the minds of modern Americans who see government as a tool to take from some and give to others granting it more and more power and authority to ensure “social justice” while eroding the very foundations that protect them from the abuse of that power.

You might think by reading this that I am a conservative or a Republican; both would be incorrect. I am a Libertarian. I hold true to one principle and that is the freedom of men to enjoy their natural born rights in a free society protected from the harm of anyone who seeks to enslave them by limited governance and a common defense. I do not want someone to pay my bills or provide me with food. I do not want the help of welfare or subsidized assistance. I want simply to live free and for my government to protect my right to earn and keep the fruits of my labor. It is this idea that must be sown into the minds of every person in this country. The idea of self reliance and the self made man must be instilled in our children. We must make others see that socialism in any form is an impossible equation which leads to mutual slavery not the uplifting of our fellow man. If we cannot do this no amount of political effort will mean a damn. If we do not effect the minds of the electorate the outcome will mean nothing more than empty words which carry empty men into office while we continue to float off course into the path of inevitable destruction and the light of liberty's torch will fade back into the darkness which has shrouded the history of man.