As a child, I used to play with the neighbors across the street in one of the coolest sandboxes one could imagine. It was built into the landscape, with giant boulders lining the back and sides. Five kids could easily play in it, building sandcastles and manipulating bulldozers and dump trucks to their hearts content. Hours could go by before being called home to dinner. There was only one problem… neighborhood cats considered that magical place as their personal giant sized litter box. We were often told, sadly, that we could not play in it because of this ongoing problem.

These past few months, renting a home in a beach community has allowed my dog and I the opportunity to take a daily walk along the shore, where I hunt for shells, watch for porpoise, and occasionally exchange niceties with the fisherman who set up their poles in the sand, and with the locals who are also enjoying their surroundings. Every day, I thank my blessings that I’ve been given this chance to live in such surroundings but my happiness is often interrupted by dogs roaming the beach, unleashed, in violation of the rules which are clearly posted at each entrance. Not only do these dogs defecate on the sand but often they are not well behaved, running at leashed dogs, children, solitary walkers, and anyone within their proximity.

I do not fault the dogs. I am a dog lover and I understand that dogs are social creatures. My problem is with the owners who clearly do not consider that some dogs may respond aggressively to such provocation, children and adults may be afraid of their beloved pets, and some beachcombers may not want to worry about stepping on dog feces, let alone experience being showered by a dog shaking out its wet fur, when their intention is to savor the sand and water running between their toes. The worst offenders do not attempt to corral their dogs around other people and assume because their dogs are friendly, all is well with the world. They do not comprehend the compromise which allows both dogs and people to enjoy this pristine environment.

The Framers understood the importance of balance, which is clearly needed to allow for maximum individual rights but at the same time allows for people to live together in a community. They believed that factions or groups of people should not be able to impinge on the rights of others.

(more…)

Looking at the Atlantic Ocean off the Virginia Beach coast, I occasionally see US Navy ships on the horizon, F-18 Hornets flying in formation, the Coast Guard helicopter overhead, and porpoise darting in and out of the waves; it’s just a part of the scenery. Having lived in Glenview, Illinois, in the years prior to the naval base closing, and outside Annapolis, Maryland, for a year, I’m very used to seeing our men and women in uniform and experiencing a military presence where I reside. What changes for me is a deeper appreciation for the job our military performs and for the freedom we cannot take for granted.

Most of the time I can go about my life following a routine that includes working on the Constitutional Literacy curriculum for our BasicsProject.org website, writing articles about the relevance of our Fundamental Law, taking my daily constitutional along the beach, and performing the chores that demand my attention, but never far from these distractions is the daily reminder that there are men and women who have dedicated themselves to our security; who have placed their lives in harm’s way to protect this absolutely ordinary life I am privileged to lead.

Perhaps the best way to really understand this reality is to contrast it with another. Around the world there are people who live in countries where citizens have never experienced the freedoms that our government was instituted to protect, who will never have the opportunities afforded to Americans to innovate, lead, and maintain the lifestyle to which we are accustomed. It is almost obscene to think that in some countries, children are subject to diseases long eradicated in our own country, hungry because there is never enough food to satisfy their appetites, and whose safety is at risk because fighting factions are unconcerned about the accidental loss of life during skirmishes and all out war between groups vying for power.

Every four years we experience an election in this country in which power of office is transferred peacefully from one person to another. How many Americans have endured a coup, war between an enemy power and our troops on native soil, or lived with the uncertainty which can stem from a majority faction taking power and changing the laws under which we operate. This is because our written Constitution was designed to preserve our rights while providing the stability to grow stronger and wealthier as a nation.
(more…)

“War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling that thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he will fight, nothing that is more important than his own personal safety is a more miserable creature and has no chance of ever being free unless by the efforts of greater men then himself. “

-John Stuart Mill

I read this quote in the past couple days and it struck me square in the face. The ideology of modern western thought was forged on the American continent from the effort and struggle to survive that imbued us with a fierce sense of independent thought and rugged individualism culminating with the DECLARATION of INDEPENDENCE and the birth of a nation. This is what the Declaration of Independence was talking about in the first paragraphs. All people are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”. It is so obvious the writers of this document had deep values precious to them and worth capturing on paper.

At this point in history, monarchies monopolized governments in countries around the world. And our colonies were ruled by leadership more than 3,000 miles away …. But everyone has their limit, right?

The early Americans had been taxed and humiliated by unjust laws and ignorant leadership. Colonial Americans knew what was being done to them was wrong and they felt ANYTHING was better than what was happening to them. So, they chose to stand for a simple notion: Man is in control of his own destiny.

(more…)

Civil rights.  Inalienable rights.  Human rights.  Animal rights.  Individual rights.  Group rights.  God-given rights.  Sacred rights.  Natural rights.  Positive rights.  Negative rights.  Children’s rights.  Parent’s rights.  Patient’s rights.  Property rights.  Personal rights.  Basics rights.  Fundamental rights.

Just what is a right?  Can some rights be more basics or fundamental than others?  Which is more important, a basic right or a fundamental right?  Do the rights of the many outweigh the rights of the few?  Are rights absolute?  One could assert whole new kinds of rights and then argue about where they fit in among all the other rights.  How about essential rights, or core rights, or perhaps preeminent rights?

Definitions of the nature and origin of rights vary widely – from a gift from God, to one of Thomas Jefferson or James Madison’s tenets, all the way down to “a good thing” – but these disputes can be left to theologians and historians and scatterbrains.  Let constitutional scholars debate the fine points of original intent or understanding (of each delegate?  or the drafter of a particular clause?  or the Convention as a whole?  or Congress?  or the ratifying state conventions?).  What really matters is how rights function within our constitutional system.

A person saying he has the right to XYZ, for instance, is saying that regardless of what other people want, he must have XYZ and society must give it to him.  To admit there is such a right is to accept that the opinion of the majority on his having XYZ is meaningless; it is to accept that your opinion on the issue is meaningless, too.  As anti-democratic limitations on the scope of majority rule, rights are like provisions of the Constitution.  Indeed, they are one and the same, because in a practical sense – the only sense that matters – a right is a government policy that must be so regardless of majority will.

(more…)

[Do not read this article without a copy of the Constitution, and if you do not have one handy, shame on you (link here).]

A line is being drawn in the sand between the statists and Americans, and I use the term American in the grandest sense.  The United States of America represents one of the last bastions of traditional liberalism, which is why the Left should no longer be identified as liberal, but rather we should continue to identify its members as progressive statists.  The Left believes the precepts of our Constitution have failed society, and thus, we must look towards the “enlightened democracies” of socialized Europe for guidance in the progression of American society.

We hear the mantra of rights professed daily by the progressives: education, work, social security, health care, etc.  And since we do not live in a state of nature, the guarantor of those rights must be the government.  This is the definition of a statist, and adherence to these beliefs is inherently in opposition to the Constitution.  The Founders recognized that government could NEVER be the guarantor of rights which is why so much of the Constitution is written in terms of limiting powers conferred upon the government.

Take for example Article I § 1:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives (emphasis added).

(more…)