Gay Marriage and The Freedom to Associate

I think it's important for you to know that I have been described by friends as being, politically, "just to the right of Attila the Hun." This is not to say that I necessarily have a mean bone in my body (OK, so I can be sort of aggressive) but that I am very passionate about the dangers of an over-active and ever-encroaching State. Our Founder's papers and correspondence are replete with warnings against the specter (HA! Specter, get it?) of, as B. Franklin put it, giving up liberty for safety. I think H.L. Menken said it best when he suggested that the main goal of politics was to get the people begging for the State to save them from the (State created) terrors of life by telling them how to live.

In our recent "shift" in DC and elsewhere around the country I have seen many people and politicians become excited, perplexed, glorified, and dismayed by all that has come to pass in the past 6-9-12 months. These events have given me much perspective; a chance to take a step back from my bias and reexamine who I am and what I believe.

I was so pissed off and angered by "W" that I felt it necessary to reexamine my positions on some subjects; which could be considered litmus tests for being a "Dittohead."

One undeniable truth that I have come face-to-face with is that The Founders of this amazing American Experiment were so right on the mark that you may not be far off to call them prophetic. Another is that the VAST majority of our current crop of politicians at all levels, but mostly the State and Federal, are liars and thieves.

...the last undeniable truth is that I have been wrong about some things.

The issue of gay marriage is really one of association: do two or more people have the freedom to associate in a way they deem acceptable, or do we in a collective, called The Government, have the right, or need, to stop them, or give them our blessing?

Politically, I am a libertarian on the issue and feel anyone should have the personal freedom to associate with anyone else of their choosing, in a way they deem appropriate, so long as they are not infringing upon the inalienable rights of another. Personally, I am conservative on the issue and think that anything other than marriage and intercourse, which belongs in the institution of marriage, between a Man and Woman is wrong. I mean no disrespect towards my GLBT brothers and sisters on this point, just that we have a religious disagreement, not a political one...fair enough?

Further, I believe that if governments are given the power to regulate such things it should only be at the State level. There is nothing in The US Constitution about marriage (but it is very clear about speech, association and conscience) and under the principles of federalism this is an issue better handled at the State level. I guess the question then becomes: do we really need permission/regulation of such a personal thing from ANY level of government?

Abiding by this concept, and if we can get ourselves back to the principles of federalism, we will have a much less powerful Federal Government. What's more is if you are GLBT you have the right to move to a State where the laws fit how you want to live, or you can change the laws in your current State through the proper mechanisms; same as me. And on that last point, the States that have done so through their legislatures or ballot issues have used the proper mechanism, using the courts becomes tyranny of the minority. I think people can be persuaded on this point, but if you force them you will lose.

What this really boils down to is the right of any free individual to live in this World in a manner consistent with their conscience, so long as it does not interfere with anyone else's same right.


In His peace, and our liberty,

Mike Poast

The IRS & The Constitution

Schulz explained that the petition that he submitted to the United States Government included the following alleged violations of the Constitution: U.S. aid to Israel, illegal immigration, North American Union, the Iraq War, The Patriot Act, the Federal Reserve, and income tax fraud.

read more | digg story

Pelosi: Dems bear no responsibility for economic crisis

So, you already have a partial grip on the economy, you want more, but it's not your fault when things go a bit south. When Obama gets elected and they ram through socialized medicine I bet they will be innocent when people are waiting in lines for simple tests and annual check-ups. Wake-up America!

read more | digg story

How the death tax bulldozed a hole in the environment

The Left's tax policy has, once again, destroyed a small business, left us with one less local farm and killed a slew of old-growth trees. They stuck it to "The Rich" though...nice job!!

read more | digg story

Michelle Obama's Boot Camps For Radicals

It just blows me away that people will read something like this and then just slough it off as though it is no big deal, or that those of us who think it is a big deal are over-reacting. When you have people who have designs for public office who say things like, "Individual salvation depends on collective salvation," they mean communism. For those who would say that these are the same views that Jesus had I would submit that, yes, well sort of, but he didn't say that it should come from government.

read more | digg story

Calling All Marylanders!!!

Is this true?!?!?!

Scared of Maryland

August 20, 2008

In 1991 I had a choice. To best work for term limits, I needed to move close to the nation’s capital. But where? Maryland or Virginia or the District of Columbia? I chose Virginia.

Nowadays I regularly travel through all three jurisdictions, though Maryland makes me nervous.

Prince George’s County police recently barged into the Berwyn Heights mayor’s home and shot his two dogs dead. Turns out their little home invasion was illegal — they lacked a no-knock search warrant, or any real case.

Weeks before this, a man arrested for the alleged homicide of a policeman was murdered in jail. Police working there refuse to cooperate in the investigation. Now we learn that many guards at the jail have criminal records and have committed crimes at the jail.

The Prince George’s County police have a long, sordid history. But you may be thinking, why lump in the whole state?

Well, the ACLU recently obtained documents showing that for 14 months in 2005 and 2006, Maryland state police spied on anti-death penalty and anti-war activists, with no probable cause of any crime. Names of political activists were entered into law enforcement databases as suspected terrorists or drug traffickers.

No wonder when the Washington Post held a contest to pick a new slogan for the state, the winner was: “Maryland — wait, we can explain.”

Hmm. But how exactly do you explain a police state?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Things Have Not Always Been the Same

This will give you a much-needed shot of perspective...

read more | digg story

Drop Dead, Oregon’s Socialized Health System Tells Patients

Either you value life, or you don't. You cannot have someone put up the cash for something yet still have a say in how that cash is allocated. The procurement of the resource is inextricably tied to the control of it.

read more | digg story

The Ultimate Resource

So you're telling me that Napolean, Ghengis Khan and Jesus could have had Iphones? YES!!Walter E. Williams does it again! What a great explanation of how absurd myopic views of society can be. Such simple language. One of the best!

read more digg story

The truth about ANWR

Pictures showing the size of the actual proposed drill area in ANWR. The article also shows comparisons of the typical pictures you see in the media to what the drill area actually looks like.

read more digg story

Read the Constitution lately?

It is truly disgusting what our elected officials do on a daily basis with the power we lend to them.

This article will, on it's surface, appear as though it is about the abortion debate. While that is a debate that I engage in, and am more than motivated to discuss, I wish to highlight what might otherwise be overlooked. This is supposed to be an Iraq War Supplemental Bill and one of our illustrious "representatives" felt it was a good idea to tack on a provision that has nothing to do with the war. Now, you can agree or disagree on the war, and you can agree or disagree on the abortion issue, but you must, in all candor, be with me when I say that the name of any bill should be in close alignment with it's contents.

One of the sneaky little tricks in Washington is something called an earmark. It occurs on both sides of the aisle and it is, in this humble thinker's opinion, tantamount to blatantly violating one's oath of office. In its essence it is a money laundering scheme with Tax Payer dollars and You should be thrown out of office for doing such things.

read more digg story

Income Redistribution: Rangel’s Reward

Democrats sure know how to say thank you. Or perhaps it’s just coincidence that a bill passed by the House last week contains a special tax perk for trial lawyers—one of the largest contributors to Democrat campaigns. Buried in the Energy and Tax Extenders Act of 2008 is a provision, offered by House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY), which would let trial layers deduct the up-front expenses they incur while chasing ambulances—er, filing contingency-fee lawsuits—whether or not they anticipate future reimbursements for these expenses. Under current law, these expenses, deemed “loans” to clients, are deductible only if not repaid. Rangel’s Reward would allow lawyers to claim deductions now and, in essence, defer tax payments until they receive reimbursements—which, as we know from watching infamous class-action lawsuits unfold, can take years.

A Rangel spokesman claims, “This is purely a matter of fairness and tax equity. The individuals who would benefit from this provision are already eligible to deduct expenses related to contingency-fee lawsuits, the only question is when.” In reality, though, the bill gives trial lawyers a green light, no speed limit, and free gas to launch a convoy of ambulance chasers.
Of course, as a rule, tax cuts are a good thing, but when they come in the form of special-interest loopholes that reward often-frivolous, economy-wrecking lawsuits, we hardly see the “fairness and equity” in that.

-REPRINTED WITH PERMISSION FROM THE PATRIOT POST_