Think twice about trading liberty for rights

When the founders framed the U.S. Constitution with the Bill of Rights, their purpose was to put in writing the limits of government. They were less concerned with what individuals should be allowed to do and more concerned with what the government should or should not be allowed to do.
These rights that we claim as ours aren’t really rights at all, but rather guarantees of what the government is not allowed to do to us.
When the United States Constitution was ratified in 1787, the meaning and purpose of its “rights” were understood. But somewhere along the way, the Bill of Rights became less about what the government cannot do and more about what “We the People” should be able to do.
Lost now is the notion that a limited government equates to individual freedom. Missing is a sense of liberty from government restraint.
Somehow, “We the People” have come to want our cake and eat it, too.
We want our rights, but we also want government to do more and more things for us. Essentially, what we are saying is that we want an unrestrained government that also respects our rights.
Only in a perfect world.
In reality, we can have one or the other, but not both.
No government can ever just give away liberty the way a philanthropist gives away money. Freedom is not a commodity. It cannot be bought. It cannot be given. It is not bestowed upon or granted out of patriarchal good graces. Rather, liberty must be earned through restraint and a willingness not to do.
When we are not willing to restrain ourselves, then we can expect more laws passed under the guise of protecting us from ourselves.
Freedom is not a selfish endeavor. Yet, today we cling to it the way a miser does his money. We regard our liberties as our “rights” to do or have things, when they are really supposed to be freedoms from something called government oppression.
Today we have groups of people demanding their “rights,” as though they are entitled to the freedom secured by the Bill of Rights. Nobody is entitled to freedom; not even Americans, who take it for granted every day. Liberty is not to be gained, but rather received. It must be contested, fought for, preserved and protected before we can claim it as our own. And even then liberty belongs to no one person, but rather to everyone graced by its touch.
But threatening liberty are rights groups invoking its very namesake. Gay rights, women’s rights, ethnic minority rights—knowingly or not, all have been squeezing liberty dry with their demands.
What rights are they seeking that they do not already have? The right to speech, assembly and worship; the right to keep and bear arms; protection against military quarter; the right to privacy and property; the right to due process of law; the right to a fair and speedy trial; protection against cruel and unusual punishment; the right to have our rights protected; and the right to participate in the making of laws independent of the government.
These essentially are the Bill of Rights, and they are the only rights I have. Besides the added amendments, such as the Fourteenth, they are the only rights any American citizen has.
Which of these rights do women, ethnic minorities and gays not have? If they are American citizens, then they already have the full compliment of Constitutional rights; no more and no less.
But apparently the Bill of Rights is not good enough.
No, we want the “right” to health care, education, a job, benefits, insurance, a house, a car, toys and even money. Gays want the “right” to be legally married under law. Women want the “right” to receive equal pay for equal work. So-called ethnic minorities want the “right” to be regarded as human equals to the so-called ethnic majority.
Equality is not a “right” at all, but rather an obligation and a courtesy extended by one person to another. It is charity of the heart, and no amount of laws or government mandates can make it happen.
In fact, none of the so-called “rights” we demand today exist or are even implied in the Bill of Rights. Yet, we insist on them. Furthermore, we demand the government secures these “rights” with more laws, more legislation, and more regulation—in short, more government.
What we don’t understand is that by empowering government to make more laws, enact more legislation and enforce more regulations, we are allowing government to act and grow unrestrained. In the end, the only thing being restrained is freedom.
Once upon a time, men believed that men—not government—were capable of righting wrongs. Those men crafted the Bill of Rights, so that men of today could operate under the assumption that man cannot be trusted to solve his own problems and instead needs government to do it for him.
Just bear in mind that each teeny, tiny little insignificant right we insist upon means one more law, one more regulation and one less freedom than we had before.
Liberty is as fragile as a sand castle on the beach. Each wave of the tide, every gust of wind and every blowing breeze takes with it a little bit of the castle until eventually nothing but trodden sand is left.
Every time government makes a law in the name of a “right,” we lose a little bit of liberty.
There’s a reason why our revolutionary ancestors adopted the phrase, “Don’t Tread On Me.” This is it.
Are more rights than what we already have really worth the price of less freedom?
Think about it. Hard.