Online Freedom of Speech Act

James Wilson of Independent Country has made me aware of the House of Representatives upcoming vote on a very crucial piece of legislation. It is called the Online Freedom of Speech Act, and it will seriously affect our blogging lives.

It seems that the Federal Election Commission is under court order to impose campaign finance regulations on the internet. That means that political expression on blogs, webpages, and even possibly emails would be regulated for content. Of-course the mainstream media would be exempt from these regulations.

We need to urge our representatives in congress to support and pass this bill if our freedom of speech is to continue unabated from government in this country.

Visit this page at DownsizeDC.org to contact your congress person to urge their support of this bill.

The Evil Quiz

I am apparently a little bit more evil than James Wilson of Independent Country.

You Are 34% Evil

A bit of evil lurks in your heart, but you hide it well. In some ways, you are the most dangerous kind of evil.

How Evil Are You?

Agorism

I have been reading about agorism, which is a, "...new ideology which asserts that the Libertarian philosophical position occurs in the real world in practice as Counter-Economics..." I would like to thank Brad Spangler for introducing me to this apparant new libertarian ideology, which attempts to bridge the gap between all persons who practice counter-economics. Counter-economics is basically the study and or practice of all human interaction not allowed by the state.

Agorism, as I understand it, is intended to help improve civilization through market processes as opposed to state institutions. Agorists recognize that every time the state intervenes in the free market, whether through tax increases or new regulations, civilization is harmed. This is true because all state imposed law is backed up by the threat and or use of deadly force.

Lew Rockwell has said before that he advocates radical changes in favor of more liberties and less government, but that he does not believe politics is the way to do it. I have wondered for a long time now how the task of achieving more liberties and less government could ever come about without the use of politics. This philosophy might be the way that it happens.

Cell Phone Blues

I was working in my yard again the other day, because I'm on a never ending quest to have the best looking yard on the block. It was time for the first application of fertilizer on my "lawn care annual plan." Of-course the stuff is slightly dangerous when exposed to skin, so upon completion I emmediately threw my clothes in the washing machine and jumped in the shower.

It wasn't until the washer stopped and I went to pull my clothes from it when I saw what a stupid thing I had done. I had washed my cell phone. And not just my cell phone, but also my phone numbers list and daily planner that are contained in that amazing little digital device. I will have to wait a few days for my cell phone company to send me out a replacement.

Maybe I should have been smarter than this, but I did not have any of that information stored anywhere else. This really made me think how dependent I am on the digital world. Why is it such a big deal when I have to go without a cell phone for a few days?

Then that lead me to think how dependent our entire society is on modern civilization. What would most people do if this vast network of communications, electricity, running water, and all the other things we take for granted suddenly stopped working for even a few days.

I have been reading a book called Lucifer's Hammer, which is about a comet that hits the earth and wipes out civilization. The people who survive are challenged with the task of rebuilding everything from the ground up.

The book and the cell phone incident have really been making me think about how dependent I am on our modern civilization. When I think about these types of things I want to buy a generator, grow my own vegetable garden, and stock up on water. Will I act on any of those thoughts? Perhaps not any time soon, but I will continue to dream of a day when I might have a home on a larger piece of property with my own power generorating capabilities.

Beautiful Sunset

I was on my way home from dining out tonight when I noticed the sunset looked so beautiful that I had to take a picture of it and share it here. I get such a strong inner feeling of peace from nature when it looks like this.

The Roe v. Wade Challenge

South Dakota has recently made criminal the practice of aborting a fetus, except in cases where the mothers life is at risk. Instances of rare birth defects and incest will not be considered exceptions to the ban.

Of-course this type of state defiance to the Roe decision could have been foreseen with the recent nominations and subsequent confirmations of Justices Roberts and Alito. South Dakota and other states that might eventually follow suit are going to test the waters of the more conservitive Supreme Court.

Although it seems the religious right in this country would rather see abortions take place in dark alleys with coat hangers for forceps instead of in clinics with sterile instruments, I support their right to make decisions governing there own local geographic locations. Because when you get to the heart of the Roe decision, it was basically a slam against state's rights. I support the right of the states to make there own decisions, as stupid as they may be, about these matters. People of small local areas coming together deciding on laws that reflect their culture and values are exhibiting the kind of activity that contributes to a free society.

Of-course the ideal situation would be to have all the governing be done at a level even more local than the states. Back in 1993 Murray Rothbard wrote, "Pro-choice paleos should hope that Roe v. Wade is someday overthrown, and abortion questions go back to the state and local levels-the more decentralized the better." Perhaps this is the beginning of the overthrow of Roe that will bring about the decentralization of state power in Washington that we paleo and left-libertarians have been waiting for.

Voting in my state

Every time there is an upcoming election I am reminded of how harsh and restrictive my state's ballot access laws are. There happens to be a mayoral race quickly coming up on the horizon, but of-course the choice is between big government and bigger government as usual.

The best part of this race so far has been that the most dominant news stories have centered around corruption and scandal.

On the democratic side we have Don McCorkle accusing opponent Kathy Taylor of voter fraud in voting in two states during the 2000 elections. McCorkle also accuses Taylor of tax fraud in applying for and receiving a homestead tax exemption for homes in both Florida and Oklahoma. Although, as a libertarian, I support Taylor's right to be exempt from any tax that may present istelf, I am not sure why she would have filed for exemtption status in both states if she knew she would be possiblly entering a political race in the future. If she is going to enter the nasty game of politics, then she better know that any law in existence will be used against her in her run for mayor.

On the republican side we have the incumbent Mayor Bill Lafortune. Now I'm not sure, but he may be the most loathed mayor by both the republicans and the democrats in the history of Tulsa politics. He is seen by many Tulsan's as being a nice man, but not necessarily a great leader - and that was sugar coating his reputation.

He has a challenger by the name of Chris Medlock, who is currently a city councilor. Mr. Medlock's views are probably the most liberty oriented in contrast with the rest of the candidates, but when tea comes to the price of China he is still a statist.

What is a Tulsa libertarian to do with his vote? Answer: NOTHING.

We Lost a Great One Thursday

I was going about my life as usual yesterday, when I got this weird, fleeting feeling that lasted for only a few seconds. I thought to myself that it had been a while since I had visited Harry Browne's website to read any of his latest articles. I remembered that he sent out an email a few months ago announcing that he had developed Lou Gehrig's Disease, and then I got this really strong feeling about him and the state of his health. Then I went on with my daily activities not giving it a second thought.

Fastforward to friday morning when I was getting ready for work. I always have the TV tuned to Fox News in the morning before I leave the house. I was walking through my living room after having eaten breakfast when someting on the ticker at the bottom of the screen caught my eye. The line read that Harry Brown had died on thursday, March 1st after having struggled with Lou Gehrig's Disease. It really shocked me that I had just been thinking about him for the first time in a while just the day before. It felt like one of those supposed inter-connectivity moments that human beings might be capable of.

I have to give Harry Browne most of the credit for introducing me to the more in depth concepts of the libertarian movmenent. After having read his books "Why Government Doesn't Work" and "The Great Libertarian Offer," I joined the Libertarian Party. Although my membership has since lapsed, I will always remember the strong, postiive influence that Harry Browne had on my path to discovering the libertarian philosophy.

Harry will be missed.

Coercion in New Jersey

Eminent domain strikes again, this time crushing the lives of residents living in Long Branch, New Jersey. The local authorities are attempting to remove, with force if necessary, the residents of Beachfront South, an ocean side neighborhood. City officials, including the slimy Mayor Adam Schneider have apparently been salivating like a pack of wolves for a few years now at the thought of higher tax revenues for the cities coffers. They plan on handing the 30 residential properties over to developers of luxury condominiums and other such endeavors. The condos will encompass five buildings totaling 350 units.



The repugnant Mayor Schneider was on the Sean Hannity radio show today slipping and sliding, like the venomous snake that he is, around Sean’s questions. Sean hammered at him for several minutes about his attempts to use the deadly force of the government to kick innocent people off of their property. The mayor just kept on repeating the same line about the progress of the city, and how that relates to his plan that has been in effect for the last ten years or so. I was very surprised and delighted to hear Sean Hannity giving this government official such a hard verbal thrashing for his disgusting behavior.

I suppose one good thing to come from the Kelo v. New London decision is the amount of national media attention it has fostered for this issue. It seems that states all over the country have begun to see proposed legislation limiting the government’s use of eminent domain. Hopefully rational thinking people all across the country will wake up and take a stand for private property rights as a result of this recent rash of government intrusion

To Vote or Not to Vote

I wrestle with this topic in my mind on a somewhat regulare basis. The logical conclusion I always end up at is an outcome of not voting.

The idea that those who do not vote have not the freedom to complain is assinine and must be squashed out if society is to achieve progress. It is my position that those who do vote are the ones who have forfeited their rights to complain. The act of voting implies an endorsement of what the politicians are doing. It is a means by which a citizen can put his individual seal of approval on all the things that government is doing and will do.

The economic freedom that Americans are losing every year as government grows will not receive my approval through voting. The fact is neither the republicrats nor the demopublicans are actually working to restore our lost freedoms, whether they be economic or social in nature. Both parties love to talk a good game at election time, but they never cease to disapoint year after year as they continue to encroach on our wallets and private lives.

Most Americans are probably unaware of the Heritage Foundation's recently published 2006 Index of Economic Freedom, which ranks 161 countries of the world based on the amount of economic liberty enjoyed by the citizens of said countries. Those Americans who do become familiar with the index should not be surprised that the USA is no longer number 1. That spot currently belongs to Hong Kong. The USA is setting comfortably, or perhaps not so comfortably, at number 9.

It is time to wake up folks! We are losing our freedoms year after year, and you who vote for the two dominating parties in Washington year after year are responsible for it. If there is not an alternative option on your ballot when you step into the voting booth that offers a true change in the direction of more freedom, then by voting you are committing a disservice to liberty and the American way.

In my state, I have only the Republicans and the Democrats to choose from. Third parties, including the Libertarian Party, have been kept off of the ballot for years due to the most restrictive ballot access laws in the country. And since I strongly believe in the idea that if you do vote you should vote your conscience, I have only the option of non-voting at election time. It is the only choice I can make under the current system that truly reflects my beliefs. And as Tucker Carlson has said of this issue, "there is no shame in that choice."

Eminent Domain

It appears that the Centennial Baptist Church of Sand Springs is the most recent victim of eminent domain. Sand Springs authorities are trying to develope the "keystone corner" area of town by booting out several small businesses and churchs. Sand Springs Centennial is standig up against emminent domain with the help of Oklahomansinaction.org through a petition that would put the issue of emminent domain on Ohlahoma in life support.

From what I understand of this issue, if enough signatures are gathered, the Representative who is sponsering the bill would not need the governor's signature to bring the initiative to a state wide vote.

This little church in Sand Springs is just the beginning if Okhlahomans do not demand back their lost private property rights. This is certainly an issue that if brought to a state wide vote, would certainly beg my conscience to vote for.

Natural Rights and the War on Terror

This information comes from an email I recently received. It was written by someone named General Chong. I enjoyed reading it, but I found some of it a little misleading. I have cut out certain parts of it and put my responses in blue font.

This WAR is for REAL!

To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country
is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it,
that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII).

The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are
very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who
realize what losing really means.

First, let's examine a few basics:

1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United
States is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks…

This is incorrect. The General skipped a few minor details that go back a bit further. I would argue that the threat to us started when the U.S government got involved in the quarrels and eternal wars of Europe during the Barbary Wars of the 1800's. As historian Richard Maybury has explained in his book The Thousand Year War in the Mideast, America entered the thousand year war between the Europeans and the Moslems in the Mideast during the Barbary Wars. The following is an excerpt from the book of exactly how America really got involved in this mess.

“In those days Moslems living in the Barbary States of North Africa were refugees from the European Inquisition, or descendants of persons killed by the Crusaders. They were levying a tax on European vessels sailing along the African coast.

European merchants somehow convinced their governments to pay this tax for them, so the Moslems knew they could make the tax quite heavy.

Resentful of the crusades and Inquisition, the Moslems raised the tax frequently. Finally in 1801 the tiny American government could no longer afford to pay.
U.S. merchantmen continued sailing through the area anyhow, and the Pasha of Tripoli captured and imprisoned the tax evaders.

European rulers saw a golden opportunity. They called the Moslems pirates and said someone should teach the pirates a lesson.

Americans knew little of Europe’s continual war with the Moslems and they apparently believed this propaganda, never suspecting that in the minds of the Moslems this conflict was just the latest chapter in the Crusades."

So you can see that over the last thousand years western governments have had a constant stream of troops on the ground bearing arms in the Mideast. Western states have had troops over there ruling and propping up puppet governments causing all kinds of chaos and instability in that region for centuries. The countries over there today were not created and drawn up by the people living there.

The Mideast started off as a region of many different Arab tribes that have never been able to get along with each other. Over time European governments carved out the Mideast into different countries so that they could more easily rule over the territory. Until the American people see it from the other side they will not understand why the “terrorists” truly hate us.
This next part about giving up our liberties especially disturbed me.

Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the
duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have
become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to! lose some of our civil
rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.

This is a very dangerous precedent to set. It is precisely a time like this that we should be as vigilant as possible in preventing our government from taking our liberties. This War on Terror is exactly the kind of thing that those in government who have wished for more power over us all along will use to grab up all they can get. Ben Franklin warned that those who are willing to give up some of their liberties in exchange for security deserve neither liberty nor security. Americans need not forget his advice or we will continue to slide into our own form of tyranny. Not the kind of tyranny like Hussein imposed on the people of Iraq, but the kind that actually convinces a man he is free while it takes almost half of the fruits of his labor each year.

For how long does the General believe that we had better give up some of our rights? Does he think we should hand over our God given rights until the last “terrorist” is killed? Who will decide when the world is safe enough for us to have our natural born rights back?

Well I have some news for all who subscribe to the General's theory. It really doesn’t matter that the General thinks we should hand over our right to privacy, which is backed up by the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment prohibits the federal government from performing searches of our person or property without probable cause. It doesn't matter because the right of law abiding citizens to privacy is a right we are born with. It is not something that is granted by the government. Once the principle of natural rights is understood then everything else falls into place logically. If the government did not give us our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then it can not take those things away from us without due process of law of-course.

Too many Americans forgot, or never learned in the first place, why the government was instituted in the first place. It was to protect those fundamental rights.

But even if the fourth amendment did not exist, the government would still not have the right to perform “sneak and peak” searches of our homes. A “sneak and peak” search is an action congress gave to the federal government vis-à-vis the U.S.A. Patriot Act, whereby the government enters your home, rummages through your things, and copies your computer hard drive without your consent or knowledge. If the government chooses not to prosecute you they do not even have to tell you they were there.

Even if the fourth amendment did not exist government agents working in airports would still not have the right to molest our bodies and rummage through our carry on bags every time we choose to board a commercial airplane.

The reason is simple really. We as individuals do not have the right to search the homes or personal belongings of others without their voluntary consent. Since we as individuals do not have that right, we can not give that right to others, or government agents in this case, to perform for us. Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.

And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then.

That point is asinine. What is this, we gave up plenty of civil rights, business. I don't recall reading in the history books about people lining up to sign away their civil rights. These rights were taken at the point of a gun, and by virtue of natural law, the government has no authority to take the rights of any person not encroaching on some other persons natural rights. I don't remember the part about the estimated 112,000 people of Japanese decent, most of which were U.S. citizens, agreeing to pack up and move their families into concentration camps. I can't seem to find it written anywhere on the agreement of the some 6,000 people, a majority of which were Jehova's Witnesses, to be imprisoned because they morally objected on religious grounds to being dragged off to war.

The government does not have the authority to simply remove and restore the natural rights of the people when it sees fit. The fact that most Americans do not see this as tyranical and outragous is beyond my comprehension.


My Beliefs

It is my belief that the only way to be safe from the “terrorists” is to do like the Swiss. An immediate withdrawal of our troops from foreign lands and a declaration of neutrality by our government would send a strong message to the rest of the world that we will no longer meddle in the affairs of others. I do not believe this plan will solve all our problems. But I do believe we will be safer and freer as a result. If we cut our entangling political alliances with other countries and encourage trade with all, we will be much better off. History proves that quite well. Political alliances are good for one thing and that is making enemies.

We should deploy our troops to action only when there is a clear and present danger to this country, and only this country. It is not our responsibility to fight for the freedom of other sovereign nations. I’m sorry to break this news, but Iraq has not ever posed a clear and present danger to the U.S. President Bush believed that Iraq posed a danger back in March of 2003. He was wrong! As soon as the army discovered that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq the President should have pulled them out. It is not the job of United States troops to build sewer systems and schools in Iraq. It is not the responsibility of U.S. troops to secure Iraq from any danger it might be in as a result of the President’s invasion and current occupation. If Iraq can not defend itself by now then it does not deserve freedom. Anyone who is not at least slightly suspicious of the fact that Iraq does not have a ready and able army by now should read I Have a Question for You by Charley Reese.

But as far as our great country is concerned, we should follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and engage in trade with all nations and entangling political alliances with none. Nations that trade with each other typically do not fight each other.

City Permits

What an asinine joke!

I get this tiny two page newsletter with my monthly water bill that communicates information to me from my wonderful public servants, aka the mayor and the city council. There was a particularly interesting feature in last months issue entitled "Test Your City I.Q...."

It reads as follows:

"If you’re going to be 'dressing up' your back yard with a deck, storage building, concrete patio or a swimming pool, do you need to get a City permit first? Yes, Yes, No and Yes! You can add a concrete patio without a permit, but any of the other three require a permit first. Don't start building a feature that's going to have to be removed! And it’s easy. Contact the City's One Stop Center at 25*-**** for information on how the process works."

I could not believe my eyes, but at the same time I was not the least bit surprised. I had been recently contemplating two of the four things listed there, and was not at all thinking about going before the local magistrate and begging for permission to build a deck. I was especially taken by the part about not starting to build a feature that is going to have to be removed. I can just imagine agents of the city demanding that someone remove a small backyard deck, which is visible to no one but the property owner from his back yard. Where is the outrage?

Where is the anger at this insane behavior of our local law makers all across the United States?

Private property rights are one of the key ingredients for a free society to prosper. The ability for one to buy property and do with it as he sees fit was one of the main points of the vision of our Founding Fathers in 1776. It gives people something to work for. Private property can be used to either build a store on to earn a living or to build a home on in order raise a family. The vision of our current public leaders is to give you the illusion that you actually own the property, but to control every aspect of that property you supposedly "own."

So I ask you my fellow Americans, where is the outrage? When are we going to say to our power hungry politicians that enough is enough, they have taken too many of our rights and they will not take any more! How much longer will we let this nonsense go on?

Katrina

"Katrina came and went with far less damage than anyone expected. It was the failure of the public infrastructure and the response to it that brought down civilization," wrote Lew Rockwell yesterday on his great website.

My heart goes out to the people of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama who need our support during this time of hardship. Especially to those who were herded into the Superdome like cattle and stripped of their right to self defense, thereby resulting in murders, rapes, and the mass devastation that inevitably ensues on a defensless population. For those who do not follow, I'm talking about gun grabbing. Some of the murders were committed directly by the very government personnel sent to help out.

The government's ineptness in this situation should not have suprised anyone. Of-course the usual finger pointing partisan hackery has begun. It amazes me that most people do not see this for what it is, a full scale government failure to successfully perform its number one job, protect the citizenry from large scale threats.

Katrina should be viewed as a learning experience. Government is not only the worst possible option to handle crisis management, it is the worst choice for crisis prevention. The faulty levees that could not hold the flood waters back were maintained by none other than the Army Corps of Engineers. Now I can not say with 100% certainty that the levees would have held up against the waters had they been in private hands, but we do know that the government failed us. The government does not have to be accountable for massive breakdowns such as this. Private companies must answer and be accountable for this kind of scenario. If they do not follow through with the services that their customers are demanding, they will lose that economic incentive and be replaced with some other entity that will. For a much more intelligent and in depth article on this topic I suggest reading Walter Block's most recent article about hurricane Katrina on Lewrockwell.com.

I pray that the American people wise up in the years to come and realize that government in general is to blame for the bulk of the devastion that is still occuring down there in New Orleans. Both the Bush administration and the democrats are to blame for the devastation going on down there. Our only hope is in private enterprise, which is ironically our method of choice when it comes to handling almost every other aspect of our lives. The areas of our life that are in the worst condition have the most government involvment, i.e. government schooling and health care. That is no coincidence.

Let us learn from this tragedy that government, no matter who is running it, is not competent enough to handle this kind of situation.

"The Traveler" by John Twelve Hawkes

I bought this book in an airport on my vacation not quite knowing what to expect. Having heard nothing about it, and not being in to science fiction, I almost passed it up.

I'm certainly glad I did not. I thoroughly enjoyed just about every page of this book, which I consider to be a quasi-science fiction, quasi-realistic fiction story.

Even though the heroine, Maya, can have a rather cold personality at times, I found myself smitten with her. There is probably a character in this book that almost every reader will be able to identify or connect with.

The sci-fi element falls more in line with the ways of the travelers, while the realistic parts encompass the actual changes that have taken place in our post-911 world vis-à-vis the Patriot Act and the Total / "Terrorist" Information Awareness program.

The author writes with a clear understanding of the evils that accompany power and corruption that always fall hand in hand with the state or organizations which have a connection with the state. The underlying tone, that those who crave freedom will always triumph over those who wish to dominate, intimidate, and control, is one of hope for a world which desperately needs it.

I anxiously look forward to the next part in this trilogy.

Good News

I listen to some form of talk radio or news program everyday and I never seem to hear good news. Until today. I was listening to the new local guy on the drive home and was informed that a few of our Republican state senators are attempting to introduce a bill that would stop my state's local municipalities from abusing eminent domain. This comes after the Supreme Court's recent assault on private property rights which rendered most private property in this country vulnerable to seizure by city government's to be handed over someone else.

Only eight other states have a law that says city government can't use eminent domain to steal private property from someone and turn it over to a private developer. I was happy to hear that some members of an otherwise destructive Republican party are actually acting to put some limits on state power.

I can't remember the last time the republicans attempted to do something consistent with the vision our founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. That is to do something that actually puts limits and constraints on the state and not on the private affairs of the people. We shall see if this bill gets anywhere after it has been tossed to the wolves in the state senate.

Fire Cracker City Shenanigans

I have recenlty written commentary on my home town's recent decision to allow the public the legal use of fire crackers this Independence Day so long as they obtain the proper city issued permit. I thought that they just wanted the extra cash since they knew that individuals all over the city would have engaged in the fire works tradition anyways. I hoped that this would go down on the books as yet another unenforced piece of useless code like so many other laws. I was wrong.

In the last several days I have spotted more police patrol units traveling down my quiet little neighborhood street than I have seen in the last ten months. Oh how I feel so much safer. The boys in blue will keep those sparkler wielding criminals at bay.

On the radio tonight I heard something new to me about the fireworks permit. Apparantly the permit expires at 11:00 pm, after which point violaters will be fined 300 dollars.

Have fun this year friends and make sure you have your permits on hand to present to the patrol officer when he commands, "citizen, your papers!"

Happy Independence Day to all those out there in the land of the free.

The End of Private Property Rights in America

The Supreme Court delt a lethal blow to private property rights in this country today. In a 5 to 4 decision they have come down on the side of local city governments to have the right to kick property owners off of their property in order for private developers to come in and take it. Many have fought imminent domain abuse in this country for years, but this decision delivers the knockout blow to the individual in this fight. No matter where you live in this country now your property is not safe. This is truly a sad day for liberty.

Typical Government

As Independence Day comes closer, a day most Americans have forgotten the true meaning of, people begin to think about fireworks. My home town government has done something I find extremeley laughable, yet holding true to typical government logic. Setting off fireworks within the city limits has been illegal up to this point. My local city government has decided that from now on, setting off fireworks will be legal. Of-course there is a catch to this change in the law. Whoever would like to participate in the American pastime of lighting black cats and roman candles must first go to the city and obtain a permit for a token fee of twenty dollars. That's right, a $20 permit makes an act which was previously deemed too dangerous to be legal now acceptable. I literally laughed out loud when I read this. A hand full of city council members and bureaucrats somewhere decided that if people are going to set off fireworks regardless of the law, they might as well legalize the acitivity and just make people pay them to do it. Visions of police officers patrolling the neighborhood demanding to see little Timmy's permit for his lit sparkler come to mind. It's disgusting. This is just another example of the abuse of power that comes with the state. They say jump and we say how high.

Christians. You love the state more than God, admit it.

I am constantly wondering how so many of my Christian conservative friends and family are so blindly loyal to the GOP. I don't understand how they can give so much support to a party that supports the welfare-warfare state. They have no objection to the omnipotent state that crushes Christian values to no end. It is that persuasion that has prompted many libertarian Christians to ask of their fellow Christians whether they have more love for the State or for God. I have been thinking about the concept of being saved by God's salvation and how it relates to who we vote for in political elections. Any devout christian will tell you that if you have had the chance to accept Christ in your heart and have not done so that you will not go to heaven. I contend that if my Christian friends have been exposed to the principles that would bring about a libertarian society and still insist on supporting Republicans, then they deserve exactly the type of anti-Christian society that they will get.

The GOP supports an overbloated government that believes stealing the wealth of one class and giving it to another is the proper way to help the needy. Now I'm no Bible scholar, but I think I would remember a passage in which Jesus proclaimes that theft is the way to help those in need.

My fellow Christians are often worried, and with good reason, about the anti-Christian values being espoused in the government schools. Libertarians and Christian libertarians have argued for years that the solution is to take the education of your child out of the hands of the government. As long as we keep sending our children off to the government for education, they will be subjected to the values and indoctrination of the anti-Christian, politically correct crowd. Of-course the best alternatives are either home-schooling or private schools where parents have ultimate control over the situation. Many have cited the expense of private schools and fear they could not afford to send their kids to one. The solution would be for the government to completely get out of the education business and hand it back to the free market. In such a society parents would not be forced to pay for a "one size fits all" type of education whether they chose to send their children their or not, as is the case today. If schooling were completely privatized there would be all kinds of choices with many price ranges of pruducts to choose from just as there are in a supermarket. Parents as customers could really hold schools accountable to the kind of teachings they aim for their children to have. If the school failed to deliver the kind of product the parent wanted, there would always be a competing school to switch to.

The state will never be accountable for the lousy education it delivers. When any government agency begins failing the government usually rewards it with more money. What kind of incentive is that? The free market would deliver much better results and would be much more accountable to the values and demands of parents.