“Must a citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.”

There are 2 very distinct and polarizing perspectives that can be drawn from this quote Thoreau here makes a great distinction between that which would be natural law - as is averse to man's law. Being somewhat familiar with Thoreau's writings, his here referenced 'conscience' and 'right' fall within the domain of natural law. The polar opposite would be a legal positivism - conscience and right being an abstract, differing with each individual. Such legal positivism would dilute conscience and right into a realm where man's laws apply. At natural law, legislators are only capable of defining that which is (fiscal law, and those laws that eternally define a just relationship to life, liberty and property) by tools like codes, ordinances, regulations, rules, statutes, etc. Rights are the just application of being, conscience being one of those absolute rights.

We hold these truths to be self evident . Natural law. One can never truly embrace Pure Liberty and Freedom from a Secular Humanistic mindset, neutral naturalistic view point. A Scarcity mindset which is self destructive. As apposed to an Abundance Mentality. One must be ready for the Paradigm Shift. Stephen R. Covey, His Principles of true North, 7 habits which create the upward spiral, parallel Paul's writings concerning growth in Christ. Common sense and exposing observation of natural law and its manifestation.

Indeed!!