THE PATH TO UNDERSTANDING
By J.W. Bryan
August 8, 2015
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Claude Frédéric Bastiat
"Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them" - Matthew 7:20
The champions of sexual deviants, sodomites, and assorted fellow travelers are really basking in the light, or maybe I should say darkness, of degradation over the 5 to 4 ruling by the Supreme Court on same-sex marriage. Many notables who have long been lurking in the shadows are now beginning to burst forth, from their former ostensible positions as respectable members in society, to laud and applaud the court’s ruling.
Justice Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion, stated in the writing of it that “gay people” have a fundamental right to marriage. Implicit in this statement is a veiled assertion that this right comes from God. Whether he and the other four Justices who concurred in the ruling are aware of it or not, the reference to rights that are fundamental is a reference to God and His authority, for all rights come from Him through His authority. Therefore, the statement that “gay people” have a fundamental right to marriage” is a perversion of God's Word. And not only that, it is a fabrication, like something only made up, i.e., a lie, for there is nothing in His Word that even approaches authority for, or rights to “gay people” to marry.
I feel certain that Kennedy, as well as others of his ilk, aren’t going to lose any sleep over the possibility that any of their decisions might be a perversion of Gods’ Word. They, as well as many of his predecessors, have demonstrably made it quite clear that they have no regard for what God has revealed in His word as to how we are to live. In fact, as I see it, they have no regard for God at all.
For all practical reasoning, the majority of the court has systematically ruled on issues in a way that was not only Anti-God, as in Roe V Wade, and many other cases, but also in ways that nullified the Constitution in so far as protecting our rights as individual citizens. To my mind this is a perversion of the law.
“We hold from God the gift which includes all others. This gift is life—physical, intellectual, and moral life.
But life cannot maintain itself alone. The creator of life has entrusted us with the responsibility of preserving, developing, and perfecting it. In order that we may accomplish this, He has provided us with a collection of marvelous faculties, and He has put us in the midst of a variety of natural resources. By the application of our faculties to these resources we convert them into products and use them. This process is necessary in order that life may run its appointed course.
Life, faculties, production—in other words, individuality, liberty, property—this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it.
Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.”
Bastiat makes it completely clear that the right to life, liberty, and property, which translates to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, comes to us from God through His authority. (How I wish they'd kept "life, liberty and property" in the Declaration of Independence rather than "the pursuit of happiness.")
He continues on with the following statement,
“Each of us has a natural right—from God—to defend his person, his liberty, and his property, these are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two.”
My commentary...please note that at the outset Bastiat says that these three gifts, life, liberty, and property came to us (were given) by God through his authority. Now I know that he didn’t explicitly say authority, but the word authority is implicit in what he did say.
Again, note this...that any one of the three gifts are completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. Thirdly, and this is very important, we can see at once that God doesn’t give these gifts to government and then let it pass them on to us. No! God gives them straight to us just like He gives (endows) us with His authority which we delegate to others in order to form a government of laws.
Bastiat goes into the origin of law and the basis for its legitimacy by presenting the question, “What is law?”
“It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense. Each of us has a natural right—from God—to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life,(which has already been noted) and the preservation of any one of them, is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two.
If every person has the right to defend—even by force—his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right—its reason for existing, its lawfulness—is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for what it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force—for the same reason—cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.” (Bold Italics Mine)
In the foregoing Bastiat reveals that the common force which has been legitimized, we might say, by the authority delegated to it by the individuals concerned here, has no authority for any other purpose, or mission, than that which it acts as a substitute for. In this case – preservation of the God-given right to life, liberty, and property of the individual. He then proceeds to restate his thesis,
“Therefore, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the life, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force—for the same reason—cannot lawfully be used against individuals or groups.”
This shows far we have allowed government to distance itself from the lawful authority which was delegated to it by the individuals which received it from God. It is almost as if government has become a law unto itself by a return to the system of Rex Lex – the king is law, rather than Lex Rex – the law is king.
Let’s remember that we are directly endowed by God with the law, i.e., authority, which we then delegate to government and charge it with protecting our rights.
Concerning the rightful use of force, Bastiat explains:
“Such a perversion of force, in both cases, would be contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights, who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can rightfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?
If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and cause justice to reign over us all.”
In reviewing Bastiat's Thesis on the law, (which begins with God) it is quite clear that we are endowed by God with the gifts of life, liberty, and property. We normally refer to these as our God-given rights. And with these rights, He has given us the authority to set up, by delegating to others, the authority to organize a force, or law with force, to secure, and protect these rights constantly.
He makes a point – at the very outset, in declaring that this is the first purpose, or mission of the law, to protect life, liberty, and property, that these three gifts from God precede all human legislation and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. It was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.
From this it is easy to see how far we have drifted away from the legitimate function of the law.
In the writing of the majority decision, Justice Kennedy very possibly made a mistake which could result in egg on their face sometime in the future. Why? Because of the authority which they used as a basis for their reasoning in delivering the decision, which was on the 14th Amendment's “Due Process clause.”
According to Chuck Baldwin’s recent article, “The Scotus Gay Marriage Decision” in NWVs, Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority said,
“Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no State shall ‘deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.’ The fundamental liberties protected by this Clause include most of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights.”
So, since the fundamental liberties protected by the Due Process Clause include most of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, then this so-called fundamental right for “gay people” to marry would have to be enumerated, would it not, in the Bill of Rights?
Here again, we find that Justice Kennedy has implicitly asserted that something exists which doesn’t, namely “The Fundamental Right of ‘Gay People’ to marry.” But there’s nothing new about this – it’s what they do.
Let’s face it, making a false assertion, or out-right lie that something exists in some part of the Constitution which enables them, (those like Justice Kennedy and his ilk) to advance the agenda to destroy this country is only business as usual; and here again – it’s what they do. It’s their method of operation (or modus operandi) which they are committed to. We have to understand that such people show forth all the symptoms of having been turned over to a reprobate mind—they have no conscience, no regard for people or the principles of God. In fact, they have no regard for God. They have actually set themselves against Him. I’m really looking forward to the fruition of that contest.
In part 11, by continuing to refer to Bastiats, “The Law,” I will go into the perversion of the law and its support of “Legal Plunder.”
© 2014 J.W. Bryan – All Rights Reserved
J.W. Bryan was born in1927 and spent five years in the Marines, from 1945 - 1951. He worked at International Paper Company for 31 years as paper machine worker, and later in quality control. He is a Lifetime member of the John Birch Society, having joined in 1961. After retirement from International Paper, he and his wife Polly worked several years as house parents in children's homes, both in Virginia and Mississippi, 1991 - 2008. They now reside in the country out of West Monroe, La. where he produces peaches, watermelons and an assortment of vegetables. He has spent his life fighting to keep our Constitutional Republic.
E:Mail: [email protected]