With all the hullaballoo over the recently-upheld Affordable Healthcare Act, it was only a matter of time before someone in politics said something ridiculous. Sure enough, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan came through for us, when he told ABC News that the groundbreaking healthcare reform law should be repealed because our rights come from nature and God, not from the government.
Ryan said, "We disagree with the notion that our rights come from government, that the government can now grant us and define our rights. Those are ours, they come from nature and God, according to the Declaration of Independence -- a huge difference in philosophy."
I'm kind of baffled as to what Ryan thinks the purpose of a government is. As an elected official, one of his jobs is to enact laws... but by his own logic, he's not really supposed to be doing that.
Being a legislator: Yer doin' it rong.
Follow Pagan/Wiccan on Twitter or Join Me On Facebook.
Ryan said, "We disagree with the notion that our rights come from government, that the government can now grant us and define our rights. Those are ours, they come from nature and God, according to the Declaration of Independence -- a huge difference in philosophy."
I'm kind of baffled as to what Ryan thinks the purpose of a government is. As an elected official, one of his jobs is to enact laws... but by his own logic, he's not really supposed to be doing that.
Being a legislator: Yer doin' it rong.
Follow Pagan/Wiccan on Twitter or Join Me On Facebook.
~~~~~~face palm ~~~~~~
Are people really this blind?
This:
“Natural rights are rights which are “natural” in the sense of “not artificial, not man-made”, as in rights deriving from deontic logic, from human nature, or from the edicts of a god. They are universal; that is, they apply to all people, and do not derive from the laws of any specific society. They exist necessarily, inhere in every individual, and can’t be taken away. For example, it has been argued that humans have a natural right to life. They’re sometimes called moral rights or inalienable rights.
Legal rights, in contrast, are based on a society’s customs, laws, statutes or actions by legislatures. An example of a legal right is the right to vote of citizens. Citizenship, itself, is often considered as the basis for having legal rights, and has been defined as the “right to have rights”. Legal rights are sometimes called civil rights or statutory rights and are culturally and politically relative since they depend on a specific societal context to have meaning.”
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights
Is a distinction Mr. Ryan does not seem to understand,
He must be one of Walker’s cronies. I’m ashamed to say that I’m a Wisconsin native. It seems as though our politicians become more stupid and backwards thinking. I swear, if this keeps up I will have to move to a neighboring state just to get away from these idiot politicians and their passing of laws that take us back to the 1940′s.
Yet another example of how conservative zealots have taken over my home state. *sigh
it;s grate that we can all jump on the soup box but is this wiccan.
Barry (5), I’m not sure what your question is. Are you asking why this is relevant on a site that focuses on Paganism and Wicca? If that’s your question, then you should be aware that we discuss lots of things that have to do with religious freedom, politics, and even pop culture here at About Pagan/Wiccan.
If that’s not what you’re asking, can you clarify?
patti
Living in Wisconsin, I totally agree with Patti. I think it has something to do with all the dairy that makes our officials not think before doing or saying something. It’s as simple as thinking, “Will I offend anybody or lor sound stupid if I say this?”
I think you got this one wrong, Patti. Without the entire text to go off of, I would say that he’s talking about the government deciding what rights we can or can’t have. We SHOULD have the right to choose what health care we want and not be taxed to take care of those who are unwilling to work/abusing the system. And it is extending into many of our rights. In the last 6 months the “government” has effectively encroached on the many of our rights in seemingly “harmless wording.” Adolf Hitler did the same thing, and we saw how that turned out. A few little things the government has taken from the people:
A bill has been passed that you cannot collect and store rainwater.
A bill has been passed that you cannot store more than 7 days supply of food.
A bill has been re-enacted whereby you cannot sell vegetables you have grown.
A bill has been passed where, by the wording, we can be jailed for protesting something we do not like.
And these are just a few small ones… MANY MORE have been encroached upon and the American people are oblivious to what is going on around them while they go about their mundane, technologically overstimulated, under-educated lives. Unless I saw the full transcript of Paul Ryan’s statement, I would agree with him that our rights come from nature and God(s) from the moment we are born. The enactment of laws IS unconstitutional in many regards. Read the constitution, Patti, see how many rights Americans of all faiths have given up, and a VAST majority of rights have been taken away under the term of our current POTUS.
Before you attack me, ask yourself this: Who can better lead and determine what’s best in my life? Me? Or a government that’s never sat down at my dinner table while I feed my family?
*Stepping off my soap box*
Kerquin, I see your point, to a point. Most rights are innate, present at birth and/or given only be a Creator, however one may envision that Creator. The point of governments and man-made laws, however, is, or should be, to prevent human nature in the form of competition and greed, from interfering in the rights of other people, and the abuse of weaker humans by stronger ones. The problem is not so much with laws per se as with laws enacted to enhance, rather than reduce, the inhibition of rights.
The founding fathers gave us an Ideal. Ideals are not realistic nor are they reality. Mr. Ron Paul may fully realize and recognize that today’s government is nothing like what those founding father’s were trying for (on paper anyway, they were as political as today’s politicians). But his trying to apply that ideal to today’s society in a sort of retroactive status is wholey irresponsible and unethical.
If the Sir cares to remember, those same Men were denying basic rights to Blacks and Females, though of the two I’m betting he’ll say Females are the lesser since his Bible dictates the same. The Founder’s claimed that the Gov’t and God should have the same goal, but not get into each other’s business. Ron Paul is contradicting himself simply by mixing the two.
RE: (8) kerquin
I Invite you to 1. Cite Your Source(s), 2. Explain Your Logic in Equating the Declaration of Independence with the U.S. Constitution….. Your Logic is as Flawed as Mr. Ryan’s in Confusing ‘Inalienable’ Rights with ‘Legal’ Rights. The United States is not a Theocracy and our Legislators do not have to Appeal to god(s) to make OUR Laws.
So is he also planning to repeal all of the Bill of Rights????? Or he’s just po’d that the Affordable Health Care Act was passed? He’s a fool, and I’m glad he never made it any further in his bid to run for president. Where do they find these “characters”??
Just to point out: Paul Ryan made the statement, not Ron Paul. Reminds me of a game of telephone.
) Blessed Be!
Since when did God or Nature write the Declaration of Independence? I’ve got startling news for him – It was actually written by public officials.
Well, first, let’s start with the bill itself. It’s invalid, illegal, and unconstitutional because of the taxation required to fund Obamacare. Tax bills must originate in the House of Representatives, not the Senate.
And HS, (11) Exactly how is my logic flawed? Do we really need people that have nothing to do with our lives to tell us how to live them? Force us to pay taxes, which are unconstitutional? Force you to even, say, wear a seat belt when it should be your decision to be an idiot and wear or not wear one? How far do we continue to let our lives be dictated by big government whilst we have no say? Did you get a say in Obamacare? (Man, I hope you’re not a Senator or that statement will backfire bigtime! lol!) I can see the need for law enforcement to the extent of keeping some people safe, though I feel that should fall to yourself as well, but that’s just me.
As for the sources for those bills/laws… (Am I right in assuming those were the sources you were asking me to cite?) Please do the research yourself, google is your friend and you seem quite a knowledgable individual.
RE: (15) Kerquin: “Please do the research yourself”
Actually, When You come here and assert statements as ‘Facts’ it is You who are Obligated to provide a Source other than “I pulled it out of my Arse…” Which is what I will now assume without further Citation.
O.K. I am now off MY soapbox!
People only hear soundbites so the accurate info never gets inside the brain.
@ Kerquin – I hear you loud and clear, and there are many who agree. The problem is that so many more are still sleepy little sheep who’d rather be told what they can and cannot do than decide for themselves.
It seems we have a couple of “opposing” groups here: one upset by the “blurps” evidencing the stupidity of some elected officials, and the other who seem to be thinking more along “all govt is our enemy” lines.
The founding fathers fashioned or govt with built-ins to hopefully keep one another in check, and they DID arrange for the writing of laws BECAUSE all people simply do not care about the rights or well-being of anyone else. So, we as a body of people require laws for the better good of the whole, the citizens; this means as individuals and groups.
The idea that any “invisible being” (god/dess) gave us certain rights that are ours without being written into laws by mere mortals is assuming we can honestly trust all of our fellows to allow us our inalienable rights. It is an unrealistic, incomplete line of thought, INMHO.And having said that, I will add that I don’t want someone else in control of my rights, inalienable and otherwise, including some readers/writers on this site. That is why I do what I can to keep up with who is doing what, and making my vote count every chance that I get, in order to have some say in what is going on with our government.
(PS: I am a Wisconsin resident too and am flabbergasted by Walker and the damages done to our state’s laws, to MY rights and the rights of others, by he and his cronies. I voted to be rid of him in the recall and continue to work to get him out of office when his term is up.)
Humans ARE human and therefore imperfect, particularly in regards to their treatment and respecting of others. Some of the “laws” quoted are evidence of that. (Yes, if you bring a thing up as proof, it falls to YOU to verify your statements, not the readers’.)
Lastly, Pagans/Wiccans have an intertest in politics too. We all too often end up with OUR rights being curtailed or openly denied by laws, or the interpretations of those laws, by some groups. We are citizens of this nation and therefore effected by the laws of our land. It is an appropriate topic for the sight.
Quote: “It’s invalid, illegal, and unconstitutional because of the taxation required to fund Obamacare. Tax bills must originate in the House of Representatives, not the Senate.”
If the House of Reps have to originate tax bills, then so be it. Let it go to them and they can work their own personal “magic” on the plan of President Obama.
Let us not knock an idea just because the President came up with it. As stated, our government was created with checks in place to try to keep each individual body in line. For the better good of all citizens.
I also resent the statement regarding those unwilling to work: There are millions on government assistance who are receiving it not because they are lazy, unwilling to work, but because they are UNABLE to work, or because there IS NO WORK FOR THEM TO DO (consider the unemployment rate that is a partial reflection of how many are actively looking for jobs that just aren’t there) and as I am a disabled person now, I am extremely glad that over the centuries, my government has taken the position that the “whole” can and will assist the “few” who cannot support themselves, and will make allowances for this very thing.
It was something I was proud of before I was disabled, something that made me hold my head high to know that I could in a small way offer a helping hand to others in need. Now that I am one of those in need, I am just as proud because the system works. It is an act of responsibility by those that have and an act of respect for a few of our citizens who have not even the least, that who are at the bottom of the “food chain” in our nation. I am not too lazy to work, and I had to work through the shame I felt at becoming disabled, of applying for, and accepting the help built into our system for those in my situation.
How dare you make such a broad, blanket accusation, and may you never find yourself in my situation, or perhaps that is just what you need: to walk in my shoes in order to teach you to respect others not as fortunate as yourself.
I do acknowledge that there are those that “abuse” the system, but that does not make the system wrong, nor everyone an “abuser”. You have simply made too generalized and biased an accusation.
RE: MY rights and the rights of others
Thank You!
I don’t know much about this, but based solely on the article, I may agree with this guy excusing his diciton. Personally, I feel like there are entirely too many laws out there governing pretty much everything we do. Such as the whole clergy thing was Patti just blogged about. The health care plan is like communism except we have to pay for it instead of the government paying for it. We need to get back to our natural rights, god given or otherwise. However, it is rather ironic coming from a politician, unless he has his job with the dream of losing it.