The New Bill of Rights

[Average Joe]

The following has apparently been attributed to State Representative Mitchell Kaye from GA. This guy should have run for President:


"We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal, bed wetters.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of No Rights."

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not intertested in public health care.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII: You don't have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won't lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you'd like. However, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat.

ARTICLE IX: You don't have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

ARTICLE X: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness -- which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights,"

 

[johnny]

ya that sounds like a great country to live in. Let the market determine if you can afford to eat tonight.
im glad i live in canada. i beleive in working for your money, but i also believe that in canada, people should not go without adequate health care. Could you imagine being in a car accident and being denied emergency care because you dont have any money? I am quite conservative myself and believe in an honest days work, but that article is rather reactionary and would not make the country a better place. if the idea of government is to raise the standard of living for its citizens those ideas are a step backwards. I could write all night about this subject, but lets just say the issues are complex and people sometimes do genuinley need government assistance. the welfare state has made canada a great place to live.
so average joe, if you beleive in letting the market dictate everything then if you have kids it should cost you about $7000 a year per child to attend elementary school, more for high school. why should every other property owner have to pay taxes to pay for your kids to go to school? I dont drive a car, why should my taxes to towards a road for you to drive on? Hmm, the term collective good come to mind....
that bill of rights is narrow minded, selfish and does not think through the consequences of what it would be like if thoses laws were applied.

 

[mrpolarbear]

only a republican would talk that shit. he must be newts and bob barrs neighbor.

 

[Average Joe]

You guys obviously took something different away from this than I did. I did not take this as a serious proposal but a way to show that we tend to take things in our society for granted. That with the rights we have been given comes a responsibility to not abuse them.

johnny, I didn't see this as suggesting that the market should dictate everything. I'm not entirely sure how you arrived at that conclusion although I do agree with you that there are some things that should not be driven by market forces. Education and healthcare being two of the biggest.

I would like to point out that I don't necessarily agree with all the points nor did suggest that I did. I guess I should have made that clear in my original post.

By the way, I did a bit more digging around and apparently it was wrongly accredited to State Representative Mitchell Kaye but was actually written by Libertarian writer and former U.S. Senate candidate Lewis Napper.

 

[alliwantislove]

... i also believe that in canada, people should not go without adequate health care. Could you imagine being in a car accident and being denied emergency care because you dont have any money? ...

If the government pays for your health care, can it then require that you don't smoke, don't consume saturated fat, don't drink, get plenty of exercise, and have your kids vaccinated even though that might violate your religious beliefs?

I am not against public health care, I'm just asking a question.

Bob

 

[Don]

If the government pays for your health care, can it then require that you don't smoke, don't consume saturated fat, don't drink, get plenty of exercise, and have your kids vaccinated even though that might violate your religious beliefs?

I am not against public health care, I'm just asking a question.

Bob

Sometimes it is irritating when I keep myself in shape, don't smoke or drink too much and only need to see a doctor once a year for a quick checkup... yet paying monster taxes into the healthcare system and essentially paying for my friends health treatment because she does not (seldom holds a job)? Hey her comment is "it's my body, I can do what i want to it..." but guess who's paying for it? You and me.

 

[Paul Waters]

Didn't the Patriots Act not make the Bill of Rights pretty much null and void?

And then there are all the "War on drugs" laws.

Ben, Tom and the boys would never recognize what the US of A has devolved into.

 

[johnny]

average joe, i thought you agreed with all the points because at the top of the post your wrote "this guy should run for president" which seemed like an endorsment to me. Also i arrived at the conclusion that you thought market forces should drive everything because of the pints raised such as, you dont have the right to a job or health care. that would mean that the market decides what you get paid for your job and that if your job does not get paid enough and you cant afford health care, than too bad.
i agree with you that things are taken for granted in our society, but that bill of rights thing was extreme, and as discussed on here before extreme measures are unacceptable to canadians.

 

[Cool Dude]

Extinct?

only a republican would talk that shit. he must be newts and bob barrs neighbor.

Ditka is a Republican.

 

[Cool Dude]

Careful now.

only a republican would talk that shit. he must be newts and bob barrs neighbor.

Ditka is a Republican.

 

[mrpolarbear]

Re: Careful now.

Ditka is a Republican.

ya but he's a northern republican.

 

[Average Joe]

average joe, i thought you agreed with all the points because at the top of the post your wrote "this guy should run for president" which seemed like an endorsment to me. Also i arrived at the conclusion that you thought market forces should drive everything because of the pints raised such as, you dont have the right to a job or health care. that would mean that the market decides what you get paid for your job and that if your job does not get paid enough and you cant afford health care, than too bad.
i agree with you that things are taken for granted in our society, but that bill of rights thing was extreme, and as discussed on here before extreme measures are unacceptable to canadians.

johnny, my post at the top was copied verbatim from an email I received. I made the mistake of not making that clear from the beginning.

I was hoping to spark some discussion and often the best way to do that is to present an extreme viewpoint. It also helps getting people to think outside of the box. Again, I messed up in not making that clear at the beginning.

They way I interpreted these "No Rights" was not that market forces should decide but that people should not expect society to take care of every aspect of their lives. Although, now that you explain I can see how it could be interpreted that way. I guess we just saw it from different angles.

One of the points that I definitely DO NOT agree with is idea that we "do not have the right to free healthcare". I believe that any modern society should provide free basic healthcare.

 

[Hepcat]

Lewis Napper is right on! No one has a legitimate right to anything that must be forcibly funded out of someone else's pocket!