Mike the difference in our positions as you stated in you stated above is whether one is talking about ones personal liberty and freedom or the liberty and freedom of the people as a whole. You have no concept of "the people" as a whole only of the person singular. I agree that sometimes to two concepts are not entirely in sync. As I have stated before culture and mannners and laws and ways of doing things often derived from the people as a whole. Seldom from an individual. When the people as a whole say what is natural in a cio-political arena then that is what is natural. Now as a member of the people you can have your say but you are not the people. Resond to the fact that constitution allowed for counting male slaves as part of the represnted population but did not allow them to vote. Now explain how that little insertion fits into your idealistic view that The Constitution and the men who wrote it were some king of Naturalistic Gods!

Ever heard of Young Repubicans or Young Democrats they are all in the indoctrination business/

My trist is in the people that is the people of today not the people of yesterrday. That means that I have some degree of trust in my own abilities to make judfgements and do not have to rely on Jefferson, or Hamilton etceterra.

The constitution has nothing to do with natural laws like earth science, botany, physics or gravity. It gave the state the right to appoint its own Senators rather than have them be elected by the people of the state. Which was natual law the original constitutional provisoion or the amended provision. I would assume guys like Mike woudl say the original was natural and the current state of amended affairs is unnatural. He would be wrong either way. Neither position has anything to do with the natural as in the categories of law I stated above - physical sciences, botany etcetera. Some might however argue that election by the people is natural and the appointment is wrong. What this example proves is that "what is thought natural" changes from time to tiem or at the whimsy of people. What should be natural is that people have the right to choose and state what is natural and it should not be dictated by some ole men in the Constitution or by modern dictators either.

There are some advocates who are telling the computer gamers and internet freaks to do exactly this, get out into the real world and off of the computer screen. I got to go and cut the grass right now. That is to real for me.

The ability to choose your doctor is limited by your HMO who chooses for you who will be in its so called Network. Go out of the network and they won't pay. There are many more bureaucrats in the insurance industry than in Medicare. That is why the insurance industry and its' CEOs eat up 20% of each health care premium dollar while Medicare only eats of 3%. I know of million dollar HMIO CEO's.

I think Mies' construction is very complete and accurate. What he is saying is that man cannot fight against or change natural law such as gravity for example. Further that gravity and the power of plants to grow towards the sun are in check, the plant has no freedom to choose to lay flat or grow without limit. If it grows to high gravity will pull or bend it over. Sorry for the lousy examples but this is what I think he means. What this has to do with socio-economic and political life I have no idea. Man and his socities and governments do not follow natural law. How Mike can think that The Constitution follows Natural Law is beyond me. It gave the South the "right" to count male adult slaves as population towards determining representation in Congress but did not allow those represented people to vote or be free. The Constitution was anything but Natual Law. It was a compromise between competing social and regional and other types of forces. If it were based on Natual Law like Mies states their would have been no arguments for or against it,

Totally contradicts Von Mises above but I agree with Weil. Von Mises would take away are freedom and insist on us choosing the natual. Thus Von Mises denies and restricts freedom and Weil proclaims and extols its.

Interesting, he seems to say that what is natual is absolute thus making what is natural a type of dictator. But the problem he fails to address is how do we know what is natural. I guess we could just ask Mike of Norwalk. I believe that people use the term "its natural" or "its just common sense" in order to get their own way. They are really saying "I do it this way and you should to for it is just common sense". I believe that sense is not as common as it use to be. Obviously we are all aware of culture clash between national cultures the foremost being the clash between Aztec and European Societies. Obviously they two totally different views of what is natural and what is common sense. Proof positive therefore that what is natural is not absolutely knowable but is a cultural phenomenon and relational phenomenon. Many in the world would find that the way we distribute health care in this country for example to be unnatural etcetera.

Great except many need to accept that the people have spoken once they have. The people will get a chance to speak again until then a little acceptance, respect and lack of bitterness is in order.

Mike we probably agree on a lot you just got your vocabulary all screwed up and you have set your opinions into some lock step mode disenabling your ability to talk and thing reasonably,.

Name me a group, church, preacher or philosophy that does not try to push off their values and views on their and others young. The communists are no different that Mike in his narrow minded and dictatorial views towards home schooling and control of his and probably others progeny. Public education in the US is the freest of this tendency with children able to be themselves and learn a wide spectrum of views and make up their own minds about things. I had a preacher say to me once "It is not so much the adults but the children that we want, why else does the Catholic Church and so many others try to get into the act" Indoctrination my friends is every where especially in the far right, I agree with RBESRQ, where or where has the middle of the road, tolerant, and moderation in all things crowd gone. I think their are many of them but they stay the hell off of this site because of the plethora of nut cases that visit it. If you are for freedom and liberty to indoctrinate your kids then in fairness (if you believe in fairness) a communist must have freedom to indoctrinate his. But whether or not you really belive in fairness, liberty and freedom is a real big IF and is up for grabs. I am convinced that Mike does not believe in any of those three.

An interesting monologue above Robert. I find your argument logical and lucid. As for Mike never. As far as religion I dunno. I quote and admire the words of Jesus, does that make me religious, I dunno. I will acknowledge that Marx gave opinions and agreed with many socio-economic practices used around the world today, does that make those users communists, I don't think so. Mike talks about all law should be Natual or God Given Law. Yet the Bible clearly says "Remember the Sabbath Day for God made the earth in six days and rested on the Seventh" does Mike keep that law of God. Mike is the biggest hypocrite, least logical writer, and biggest phony on these pages. He claims to support The Constitution which set up a law making branch called Congress but then Mike says law can only come from God. I think he denies and is a traitor to The Constitution and the Nation.

I see the ignorance daily. In my local bar an acquaintance said to me "the US is a republic not a democracy", Yesterday in Gatlinburg, Tenn. a hotel counter man said to me, "the US is a republic but we elect our government by the democratic method", he then went on to pick an argument with or look down upon the old fashioned term Commonwealth, as in Virginia Commonwealth or Pennsylvania Commonwealth, or the British Commonwealth of Nations. He wondered "what is a commonwealth". I explained that it is just another word for "state". Just as many New Enlgand and English towns use the term "the commons" to refer to the village square the term Commonwealth relates to the property (roads, dams. parks, buildings, infrastructure, land) belonging to the people as a whole, held in common. How is it that grown folk in this country have become so ignorant of common sense and common terminology. I am attempting on this site and in all of my contacts to counter this ignorance and debauched way of thinking. Yours for the diffusion of knowledge and the preservation of virtue, I remain, forever yours da Waffler.

Adams really had it right and all of those tort reformers and those who would deny people the right to resent injury and deny them the feelings of indignation against wrong are the enemies of true freedom. If the right to sue and be sued, to redress wrongs and injuries in court are removed by the enslavement of the people is underway. Strangely and scary enough many of the same folk who talk about "freedom" the loudest also talk about taking away peoples natural right as a human being to protest, sue and right wrongs against them and their fellow man.

So the revolution was a private endeavor (apparently Justin never heard of the Continental Congress), the Louisiana Purchase was also a private endeavor as was the purchase of Alaska, the railroad land was purchased privately, the War of 1812, Indian Wars, Civil, WWI, and II, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq were all private endeavors. The Erie Canal, I&M Canal, Panama Canal, the Interstate Highway System, Hoover Dam, Grand Coulee Dam, all dams were a private endeavor. A man land on the moon by private endeavor. Justin are you begining to smoke the same weed as Mike, Jim K, J Carlton and company. The weed of utter ignorance.

If Mike and his hangers on are correct that law can only come from GOD then how do you explain your defense of The Constitution and its creation of a law making body called Congress. As I said before Mike is a hypocrite and a liar, one of the worst I have known. He claims that our framers and fvounders were acting and creating a repuclic based on "natural law". How do you explain the fact that they included the right and power of the governed to Amend The Constitution. The right to Amend did not come with any caveat that "any amendment must be in accordance with natural law".

Go live with Sarah J I think she is right up your alley and according to some news, available.

Society elects government. Justing are you saying your mayor, governor and senator etc are not part and a leading part of society. In your world does anyone lead society.

You guys are flakes!

Something missing here. Does no one read the news. Economy up, stock market up, banks paying back the treasury, treasury is making a nice profit on its bailouts, Detroit is hiring and uping production. The only ones who are self destructing is right wing nuts. From Sarah down on the line they are just blathering idiots.

Mike thy name is hypocrisy. Instead of using the common every day expression of "law obidence" or "law enforcement" he uses the term "compelled compliance". After all that is what law is. Then he accuses others of changing meanings. I have asked him if he means by his terminology that he is against LAW in all or any of its manifestations and he just so to speak sits there apparently dumbfounded. I point out the failure of the above quote to be appropos or universally true by responding to Mike's off topic remarks concerning health care. As any elementary or rudimentary student of American economics and industrial history knows is that our succes came from the interchangeability of parts, separation of labor, and specialization rather than one man building the entire edifice or a custom made gun. Thus we became interdependent rather than independent in the realm of industry and medicine. The problems with health care Mike is the American Greed of the insurance industry. Explain this one. I take Propecia for hair loss. My local Rite Aid Drug store charges me $68 a month. I get a generic version in Mexico for $28 a month. I just received a three month supply from Cheapodrugs.com for $15 dollars a month. This last shipment was sent from the UK. Why do you abhor being ripped off or compelled or having your money ceased by "government" but can't see anything else. You read the Bible. You "see the mote in others eyes but cannot see the log stuck in your own". I hope you have a wonderful day, poor chap.

This is good, very good indeed. We need a balance between vigilantism and good citizenship.

Sadly Warren failed to mention the Senior Senator from Mississippi who ignored the Army Corps of Engineers who stated emphaticly that development was being done to close to the coast and in fact the Senator had the guy who was telling the truth fired and just kept on building.

I am not in this to look good or come off good or get votes. I am in this only as part of a Truth Squad.