As you likely understand, I am in total agreement!
In my upcoming book, I imagine myself in attendance at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, on September 17, 1787. I imagine myself as a thoughtful and "arrogant" fifty-seventh delegate - together with the fifty-six invited from the colonies.
Delegates who perhaps represent the greatest gathering of enlightened political thinkers of the time. I would argue at ANY time, in history. I have been inspired by their intelligence, moved by their intellect, and impressed - as they resolve issue upon issue impeding their progress toward their goal, by their combination of resigned and determined resolution.
There is, however, trouble in paradise. Not just the "trouble" with the issue of slavery, but one of even far greater consequence.
As he is recognized and rises to speak, his manner is somber and reserved – unusual for such an arrogance.
“Gentlemen: (There were no women present. Additionally, it would be quite a while before the ideals expressed in Jefferson’s profound Declaration would politically include women, black Africans, and Native Americans). The political institutions you envision, and have remarkably fashioned, do not have the moral foundation to secure the ideals stated in Mr. Jefferson’s unprecedented Declaration.
Specifically, one cannot argue on behalf of a human being’s political right to their own life, creating political institutions designed, debated, and adopted to then secure same, while at the same time accepting of a morality that a human being has a universal higher moral obligation. One that demands they live their life in service to some other purpose not of their choosing - either to other human beings, or an imagined greater entity or abstraction.
Those for whom you wish to politically-secure such a right, and from whom its recognition and respect must be understood and defended, will disagree with it, while they maintain that each among us has a “higher” moral duty to fulfill, one that makes the “right” to one’s own life, subordinate.
This tirelessly repeated moral prescription has destroyed whatever expression of an individual’s right to their own life (individual rights!) that may have been temporarily recognized in past societies, without exception. In the absence of a proper moral defense of them, this body’s unprecedented attempt at their political consecration shall become doomed as well.” – David Walden, August 12, 2005.
This is well and clearly stated: "The problem is that practicing a morality of selflessness and sacrifice disarms us against those who want to use government force to institutionalize such practices throughout society. After all, they say, if we subscribe to a morality of selflessness and sacrifice, what better way than for the government to help us fulfill our moral ambitions? A vote for universal healthcare, for food stamps, for social security, for government education, for tariffs and subsidies, for more regulation, is a vote to help us live up to our moral ideals...."
"The goal? That those who walk in economic moral darkness shall see a great light."
That reminded me of a quote I keep above my desk: "They meet with darkness in the daytime, and grope in the noonday as in the night." When I encountered it the first time I immediately applied it to the branch covidians, but it works for the "muh roads" crowd, too.
Anders:
As you likely understand, I am in total agreement!
In my upcoming book, I imagine myself in attendance at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, on September 17, 1787. I imagine myself as a thoughtful and "arrogant" fifty-seventh delegate - together with the fifty-six invited from the colonies.
Delegates who perhaps represent the greatest gathering of enlightened political thinkers of the time. I would argue at ANY time, in history. I have been inspired by their intelligence, moved by their intellect, and impressed - as they resolve issue upon issue impeding their progress toward their goal, by their combination of resigned and determined resolution.
There is, however, trouble in paradise. Not just the "trouble" with the issue of slavery, but one of even far greater consequence.
As he is recognized and rises to speak, his manner is somber and reserved – unusual for such an arrogance.
“Gentlemen: (There were no women present. Additionally, it would be quite a while before the ideals expressed in Jefferson’s profound Declaration would politically include women, black Africans, and Native Americans). The political institutions you envision, and have remarkably fashioned, do not have the moral foundation to secure the ideals stated in Mr. Jefferson’s unprecedented Declaration.
Specifically, one cannot argue on behalf of a human being’s political right to their own life, creating political institutions designed, debated, and adopted to then secure same, while at the same time accepting of a morality that a human being has a universal higher moral obligation. One that demands they live their life in service to some other purpose not of their choosing - either to other human beings, or an imagined greater entity or abstraction.
Those for whom you wish to politically-secure such a right, and from whom its recognition and respect must be understood and defended, will disagree with it, while they maintain that each among us has a “higher” moral duty to fulfill, one that makes the “right” to one’s own life, subordinate.
This tirelessly repeated moral prescription has destroyed whatever expression of an individual’s right to their own life (individual rights!) that may have been temporarily recognized in past societies, without exception. In the absence of a proper moral defense of them, this body’s unprecedented attempt at their political consecration shall become doomed as well.” – David Walden, August 12, 2005.
This is well and clearly stated: "The problem is that practicing a morality of selflessness and sacrifice disarms us against those who want to use government force to institutionalize such practices throughout society. After all, they say, if we subscribe to a morality of selflessness and sacrifice, what better way than for the government to help us fulfill our moral ambitions? A vote for universal healthcare, for food stamps, for social security, for government education, for tariffs and subsidies, for more regulation, is a vote to help us live up to our moral ideals...."
Nice work, Anders.
"The goal? That those who walk in economic moral darkness shall see a great light."
That reminded me of a quote I keep above my desk: "They meet with darkness in the daytime, and grope in the noonday as in the night." When I encountered it the first time I immediately applied it to the branch covidians, but it works for the "muh roads" crowd, too.