DO YOU HAVE THE RIGHT?

There is nothing more personal as one’s health. No amount of wealth, power, or prestige can overcome the loss of it, and thus, there lately seems to be no end to the clamor concerning health care reform. Today’s banner issue is whether people have a “right” to affordable health care.

The dictionary defines a “right” as, “a just claim or title, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral . . . that which is due to anyone by just claim, legal guarantees, moral principles, etc.”

Thus the argument is that people should have the just claim or moral guarantee they are able to receive medical treatment if they fall ill. Everyone should have the “right” to good health, right? The conjecture is that our present free market heath care system somehow abridges this concept.

Are we not presently free to buy health insurance, avail ourselves of emergency services, and to seek out any form or fashion of health care we choose? Granted, we can’t all afford the same level of care or quality, but that imposition is not on the part of government, but rather is a limitation brought to us by our own economic choices.

And what is “freedom”? According to the dictionary, it is “Exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc.; the power to determine action without restraint.”

Again, no right is denied or abandoned on the part of any societal or governmental infringement . . . that is, at least for now.

While we have the freedom to exercise our rights within the American framework, we are often either unaware of or completely overlook the fact that freedoms and rights are not sacrosanct. They exist only as long as the one who wishes to exercise them is also willing to adhere to and maintain them.
Both freedom and rights can be lost, or rather, forsaken. It’s all in the tenacity of a society in guarding them, and once we become apathetic in that regard, we open the door to tyranny or at least to oppression by those who wish, regardless of intent, to set limits, boundaries, and controls.

According to the Declaration of Independence all men are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” Reading further, it is the purpose of government to “secure these rights”. But the ultimate point is that God endows, and the only function of government is to ensure that this endowment is never supplanted.

Moreover, our very Declaration of Independence claims that, “To secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” In the eyes of our forefathers, government was solely to secure and protect liberty, and only to act with our consent.

The reason government cannot grant rights, is because it is only a servant of the people, and not in equality to God. According to the founders, the endowment of rights was to be left to the Creator. No human institution was to interfere with, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Of course, reason injects that there must be some order to society, and part of securing liberty for all means that some freedoms must be subjugated to the public good. Obviously, by abusing freedom, such abuse infringes on the rights of others. For example, killing another individual may celebrate your liberty, but it also deprives your victim of their right to life. And so it follows that mankind needs some form of administration to ensure the operation of justice and freedom, and that liberty not lead to oppression.

The founders sought a balance between the responsibility of the state to keep the peace, and the freedom of the individual to seek the fruits of their own labor.

But with liberty, there also comes responsibility. In the early summer of 1776, and later in September of 1787, the great men who wrought our republic hammered out the guiding documents that set us on the road to becoming the nation we are. This wasn’t done by chiseling out a narrow pathway in which the country, as if on rails, would continue forward without regard to growth or change. They gave us the power of freedom, which was the very nature of why they revolted against their sovereign in the first place. But in doing so, they also gave us the ability to evolve, whereby we are no longer the nation they originally envisioned.

In regards to liberty, their aim was boundless. In regards to responsibility, they saw it fit that the government was to protect the borders, ensure equal trade between the states, enter into international treaties on behalf of the people, and to create just laws and uphold them through an unbiased judiciary. And so government was to serve the cause of promoting the general welfare by fostering the opportunity for her citizens to pursue happiness, without any requirement to grant it.

By “equality”, they simply meant that all men, being equal in generalized nature, were unfettered, or free, to seek whatever fortune their own ability in choice would lead them toward. There never was a mandate for public charity, and in fact, many of the forefathers warned against it.

In the words of Thomas Jefferson, “To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it." (Letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816)[1]

Some who have held the office of President, such as Roosevelt, Johnson, and now Obama, in their war on poverty, are in direct opposition to the concept held by the very man who penned the Declaration of Independence. While all men have the right to live well, and as they are given protection of their liberty to exercise such, there are, however, no guarantees they will meet with success. It was never envisioned that we should have equality of outcome, but rather, that all men were set free to seek their own destiny, by a path of their own choosing, and through their own good judgment and dedicated industry.

This is an essential concept within American political doctrine, as it also betrays the caldron from which the poison of tyranny is brewed. We must return to the Declaration to understand that the boundary of government is set at whatever line to which the governed are content to draw. As the first words of the Constitution announce, “We the People . . . do ordain and establish.”

While the rights of the citizenry can never be usurped, they can, however, be forsaken. And that’s the heart of why it is so essential that liberty be our first cause, and only when one person’s freedom is abridged by another, should any laws or legislation exist. That was the founders’ intent. They sought to create a nation whereby people had the complete freedom to act, gather, speak, work, trade, and essentially live, without the infringement of government. But, in the words of Thomas Paine, "Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it." (The American Crisis, No.4, September 17, 1777)

Because living in a free society is arduous, liberty can be abandoned and rights lost. You see, because government can only grant privileges, once the authority to rule is conveyed to it, the individual risks losing the right of self-determination. For example, anyone has the “right” to own a car. All you need is the economic means to purchase a motor vehicle. You do not, however, have the “right” to drive it once you own it.

When automobiles were first invented, anyone who wanted one could have one and use it at will. You simply bought the car, started the engine, and off you went along your merry way. But not everyone was responsible in their driving habits, and over time the people determined that in the name of safety, the operator must have a permit. Consequently we have the driver’s license, and the “right” to drive was abridged by the consent of the people.

Therefore, we have established that regardless of the Constitution, the people are able to abdicate their place as free citizens and take on constraint. Rights are lost and freedom compressed because the will of the people have vacated them.

It is, after all, the character of government to govern, and much the same as nature abhors a vacuum, so government will fill the void left behind by an indifferent or unmindful electorate.

But why is this erosion occurring in a country that was born from the act of throwing off the yoke of oppression? In a word, apathy comes to mind. Ignorance too has beset the very people who select their representation based on the most arbitrary traits, such as personality and physical appearance. History is full of finely dressed men who spoke well, yet acted surreptitiously once handed the reins of power. And yet, we never seem to learn from history.
To ensure the security of their office, in the manner of potentates throughout the centuries, our representatives found it quite useful to buy the indulgence of certain people with the revenue collected from the public at large. Much like any ponzi scheme, politicians are good at fleecing the flock, then handing out the booty to those who will continue them in power. And so, the word “right” has further morphed into “entitlement”.

The latest cry of the “disadvantaged” is that everyone should have a “right” to “affordable” health care. Do we have the right to treatment for injury or illness? Of course we do! But to say we have the right for it to be affordable, as Jefferson outlined, makes a mockery of liberty. To engage in determining affordability is to hamper the exercise of free commerce, and is then an affront to those whose enterprise it is to provide such services. If philanthropists are so inclined, let them donate toward the health care of others, as they surely have that freedom. There is no hindrance thereto. But to demand that all be willing to give up their industry for the sake of charity is a usurpation of the very nature of our founding documents.

No man is entitled to the fruit of another man’s labor!

To codify such action is to, in a sense, nullify the laws against theft. Were you or I to take from a wealthy man In order to, as spoken by our President, “share the wealth”, we would find ourselves in front of a magistrate just prior to conviction. And yet, the people of our once free nation no longer see this as an issue. Welfare is generally accepted, and we further confuse charity with pillage.

Worse yet, once established, these actions are nearly impossible to reverse. As people come to rely on state or federal programs for their daily sustenance, they quickly become unable to care for themselves. In the loss of liberty, they also lose industry, and a once proud and productive working class, devolves into dependence, taking the whole of our nation with them into decline.

We are now in the process of writing the “Declaration of Dependence”, whereby we the people are reduced to “We, Some of the People”, all because we continue to choose representatives that are only willing to represent special interest for the sake of their own desire for power. Thus, we are truly lost. They will pass health care reform that has no reforms at the behest of Big Pharma. They will continue to buy other people nice vehicles with the money we entrusted to them for education and our infrastructure. They will set rules and regulations that protect the delta smelt at the cost of our country’s bread basket, and they will pour countless $millions into foreign banking interests to protect their nest of campaign donations.

It’s time to awaken America! Robin Hood was, in truth, a thief, and no amount of injustice to one class of men will ever create equity for another. Should we not heed the words of Benjamin Franklyn who stated, “I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means; I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it."

If we truly want health care to be affordable, then shouldn’t we foster full employment, and remove the present government shackles from the free enterprise of medical delivery, research, and insurance? Could we not contain malpractice, and ease the tax burden of our citizens through medical savings accounts and expanding various deductions? Otherwise, as is presently proposed, we will place our “right” of quality health care into the hands of an incompetent, for government surely is unable to grapple with the complexity that the free market has well shouldered for ages.

Do we really want to give over our “right” in replacement for “permission”?
That which the government controls, is that to which the people no longer have a right. So if the state determines that a given procedure or medication is either impractical or too expensive, they may nullify such care at will, and you, therefore, have lost the permission for your desired wellbeing. You are at the mercy of the state, and no longer have a just claim or entitlement for your treatment.

If you fear not having the right to quality health care, should you not more intensely fear Washington’s plans for its arrogation?

Or are you deaf to the calling of our second President, John Adams, "Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

At least, for the moment, you have the “right”. The question is can you keep it? I guess that’s all answered in how we choose to be governed, and we’ll know soon enough. 2010 is right around the corner, and it’s time once again to give our consent.

David J. Arthur
Patriot
Defender of Freedom

Writer’s Note: As with all of my works, you are more than welcome, and in fact, I encourage you, to copy and send them forward to all who need to hear these lessons on liberty. This message is far too vital to ignore. I only ask you give credit where credit is due and post my name along with my words. Comments below are welcome.

---

[1] In appreciation to the work of Dr. Walter Williams, this, as well as other quotes, was taken from his website, http://economics.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/wisdom.html, of which I strongly recommend all to read and reflect!