Showing posts with label church and state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label church and state. Show all posts

Monday, November 10, 2008

The Choir Sings the Hymn "Individual Sovereignty"

Today, I refer you to several sites I think have importance to metaphysical naturalism, of which the concept of individual sovereign rights is the only moral political system qua system worthy of man.

This includes capitalism as the only economic system qua system worthy--because of its unalienablility--of the sovereign rights of man; it includes the sovereign rights of individuals to marry without the dogma of religious intolerance for homosexuals overwhelming the wall of separation between church and state; and on a little bit of a different subject, but same theme, the attempt--as bungled as it was--to make the American public see the hidden agenda of the impending Obama economic spectacle, not to mention the leftist political agenda of a man who has friends most of us would shun.

Curtis Edward Clark



Venezuela, Russia, and other countries that nationalize natural resources are violating private property rights.
By
Thomas A. Bowden

For years, the Canadian operator of a huge Venezuelan gold project known as Las Cristinas has been seeking an environmental permit to start digging. Well, Crystallex International Corporation can stop waiting--the mine is being nationalized as part of dictator Hugo Chavez’s long-running program of socialist takeovers. “This mine will be seized and managed by a state administration” with help from the Russians, said Mining Minister Rodolfo Sanz.

It’s not surprising that a brute like Chavez would want to grab the 16.9 million ounces of gold estimated to lie buried in the Las Cristinas reserve. But what’s more puzzling is why--when gold mines, oil rigs and refineries worth billions of dollars are nationalized by regimes such as Venezuela and Russia--the ousted companies can muster no moral indignation, only tight-lipped damage appraisal.
[For original with Continuation, click on the headline] Ayn Rand Institute Op-Eds


Proposition 8 and Race
[Prop 8 was on the California ballot]

Wayne Besen

I can understand why white gay people are angry. I certainly am. But, let's take a step back and look at this dispassionately. I believe our failure with the African American vote (70% voted in favor of Prop. 8) has more to do with education levels than race. In general, people with lower levels of education - of any race - do not vote for gay rights. White people are twice as likely to graduate college as black people. This accounts for the difference by race on Prop. 8.

Think of it this way. 57 percent of white people with a college education voted No on Prop. 8. Yet, 58 percent of white people with no college voted yes on 8. In other words, uneducated urban black people vote very much like uneducated rural white people.

Uneducated people - black, white and Hispanic - often derive their power from physical strength. They perceive being gay as weak and antithetical to real manhood. By voicing support for gay rights, they lose status and often fear rivals may perceive them as gay. The easiest way to gain status is dissing faggots. I see this attitude all the time in Brooklyn - in the gym and on the basketball court, where I often play. (Not the best sample, I realize this)
[For original with continuation, click on headline] Wayne Besen - Daily Commentary

The Sarah Palin - John McCain Highwater Mark

There was only one catch, and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind.

Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and he would have to fly more missions.

Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them.

If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to, but if he didn't want to, he was sane and had to.

Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.

"That's some catch, that Catch-22," he observed.

"It's the best there is," Doc Daneeka agreed.
[This was the entire posting. It seems apropos to what the McCain Campaign was all about. But if you wish to see it in its original, click on the headline] No Exit



The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:

© 2008 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/









Thursday, October 2, 2008

Natural Rights and Capitalism; CFI & Scientific Integrity

A Short Treatise on Natural Rights and Economic Capital
"Naturalism in economics requires capitalism," I wrote, back in September. Natural Capitalism; Determinism, Compatibalism, Free Will; Wm.Penn

Naturalism in ethics requires the non-initiation of force in order to make individual sovereignty work, and individual sovereignty is the natural state of every distinct human. It is what he/she would have if he/she existed as the only human on the face of the earth.

In order to "secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity," the American Founders relied on the concept of common sovereignty. " Popular [or common] sovereignty is the notion that no law or rule is legitimate unless it rests directly or indirectly on the consent of the individuals concerned. [John] Locke in his...'Second Treatise of Government,' published 1690, claimed as Hobbes before him, that the social contract was permanent and irrevocable, but the legis­lative was only empowered to legislate for the public good." http://www.basiclaw.net/Principles/Popular%20sovereignty.htm

The public good was described in the Constitution as the "general Welfare." But in "securing the Blessings of Liberty upon ourselves and our Posterity," we are forced to recognize that "ourselves" are selves which belong to individuals.

There is no general, public self except as defined as being those democratic decisions of the people and/or their representatives when such decisions do not violate the individual sovereignty left to each individual after he/she has given up a tiny portion of it to the "popular" sovereignty, from which it must be derived. MORE

CFI Input Helps Craft Legislation
Protecting Scientific Integrity

H.R. 5687, Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Amendments of 2008 was passed by both Houses of Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c101:H.R.5687.ENR Center for Inquiry staff plus a volunteer helped both to craft the language of the bill and shape its substance.

What does that mean to us and what are FACA Amendments? The bill increases the transparency and accountability of Federal advisory committees. It is intended to counter the tendency of the present administration to put on advisory committees—especially on scientific and health-related topics—people who are politically connected rather than qualified by expertise. CFI staff made recommendations to ensure that advisory committee members are impartial and have no material or political interest in the topics on which they are giving expert opinion.

Ideas and language in the FACA Amendments were supplied by Ronald Lindsay, CFI’s chief executive officer; Derek Araujo, executive director, CFI New York City; and Daniel Horowitz, lawyer and CFI volunteer. They jointly authored a CFI position paper titled, “Protecting Scientific Integrity: An Update and Additional Legislative Proposals,” published on CFI’s Web site in October 2007. Lindsay, Araujo, and Horowitz provided language in the sections on political affiliation, committee membership, and establishment of advisory committees. In the conflict of interest section, the bill’s language differs, but the meaning is the same. In addition, each of CFI’s recommendations was adopted in some form.

Click these links to visit the Washington, D.C. branch of the Center for Inquiry, to learn more about the CFI Office of Public Policy, or to visit the CFI-OPP blog.

To view the 29-page position paper in .pdf format, follow the related link provided at the bottom of
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/news/cfi_input_helps_craft_legislation_protecting_scientific_integrity/

Note: I will be the featured speaker at the CFI meeting, October 16, 2008, in Portage, Michigan. The topic is "Atheism as a 'Religion' Protected by Courts According to the Establishment Clause" CEC

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the sm of the

Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism tm, the educational arm of the Assemblage.
© 2008 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®