Check out our upcoming events and plan to join us in March and April as we kick things up a notch with our County Commissioners discussing Hydro-fracking, then we’ll be Recognizing Liberty and questioning Congressional Candidate Robert Blaha plus enjoying special guest speaker Ann Barnhardt.
Milton Friedman and the Morality of Capitalism
A Food for Thought [...] [...]
Liberty On The Rocks (Red Rocks) Happy Hour Tavern Style Politics with Senator Tim Neville, Rep. Libby Szabo, & David K. Williams Jr. “State Legislature Mid-Session Report” March 5th, 2012 Sheraton Denver West Hotel Red Rocks Grille Lounge (bar/restaurant adjacent to the lobby) 360 Union Blvd. Lakewood, Co., 80228 5:30 – 7:30 p.m.(Speakers generally begin at 6:00, happy hour till 7:00) RSVP’s are always [...] [...]
OVERVIEW OF COMPASS COLORADO: Compass Colorado is a non-profit organization committed to educating Colorado voters on critical national and state fiscal and economic issues while simultaneously advocating for America’s founding principles of individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise. The mission of Compass Colorado is to engage citizens across the state in the political process [...] [...]
On Saturday, February 11, Liberty on the Rocks hosted their first-ever free market economics training session for liberty enthusiasts and activists in the Denver Metro Area. So what was the result? A fabulous educational seminar with more than 60 active and lively attendees! Some even traveled more than an hour to be there. So what attracted [...] [...]
First meeting for March. Plenty to talk about that is going on at the local, provincial and federal level. As well, always news on the GOP race. Hope to see all the regulars as well as old friends and newbies are always welcome. Cheers for liberty! Event [...] [...]
Senator Santorum, you have labeled yourself the only true conservative in the race. We are in Arizona, the birthplace of Barry Goldwater, who was known as “Mr. Conservative.” Senator Goldwater’s opinion toward the religious right was well-known. It ca… [...]
David Steiner, in his Colorado Voices column today, makes a common statement that bears some thought. (See “Take a tip from fourth-graders“
Steiner was a judge for an American Legion speech contest for high school students. The topic was the United States Constitution. “The high school students talked about … how long it had taken for blacks to be counted as more than three-fifths of a person,” among other topics, he said.
It has been my experience that most refer to that provision of the Constitution as an example of the racism that existed at the time. I find that curious, since the existence of slavery is a much better example. The “Three-Fifths Compromise” is found in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution. It reads:
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
What does that mean in modern English? It means that when counting the population of a state for purposes of determining the size of that state’s Congressional delegation, slaves would be counted as 3/5 of a person.
The problem was not this compromise, the problem was slavery. I find it disproportionate to cite this compromise as evidence of racism when it pales in comparison to the actual bondage of human beings. It is as if someone says, “yeah, there was slavery in Colonial America and people were owned like common chattel, but the real injustice was that they were only counted as 3/5 of a person when it came time to determine congressional representation!” In that light, it is absurd.
If asked, I bet most think it was the slave-owning southern states that did not want to count slaves as full people. After all, slaves were just property. But, no, that was not the case. It was the northern states that did not want to count slaves at all. Upon reflection, this makes sense. If slaves were counted in full, the south would have had a larger voice in Congress.
Therefore, the pro-slavery contingent wanted to count slaves as full people, but the anti-slavery contingent did not want to count them at all. This juxtaposition demonstrates the folly of citing the Three-Fifths Compromise as an example of racism.
The compromise is historically important, but not as important as the institution of slavery itself.
<img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/4099162-3333323182977276540?l=www.bluecarp.com' alt='' [...] [...]
What would a free market film/media industry look like? Who truly controls what we can view in the theater or at home? Does Liberty and Freedom of Choice have a place in the media related industries or are we all lost to the propaganda of a few? Come find out and celebrate liberty and [...] [...]
The executive director of the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative, my friend Dede de Percin, does her best to sell us on the benefits of Obamacare in the “Perspective” section of today’s Denver Post. (See “Why Obamacare is good for America.”) I quot… [...]
The Denver Post headline reads, “Family: System failed child
It is a horrific story of an abused four year-old boy, now dead, allegedly at the hands of his maternal grandmother. The grandmother had been awarded custody of the boy’s two older sisters. The boy was living under her care, as well. The boy’s name was Gabriel.
Gabriel’s paternal grandmother had called the county Human Services department multiple times over her concerns about the boy’s treatment. The State will now investigate the circumstances of the boy’s death and the county’s response to the previous complaints. That investigation may or may not find problems with the county.
Ultimately, however, Gabriel’s death is not a failure on the part of the government, although it may have played a part in not preventing it. Ultimately, the system did not fail this child.
Ultimately, his family failed him. The article makes no mention of his parents. Where are they? Perhaps they have passed away and the boy is an orphan. If not, where are they? Gabriel was not under the legal custody of his maternal grandmother, only his sisters Where were other family members ready to take care of the boy? Where was the church?
This tragedy underscores the futility of looking to the government for protection. No one in the Department of Human Services was Gabriel’s blood. No one in that department was Gabriel’s mother. No one in that department was this Gabriel’s father. No one in that department was Gabriel’s family. No one in that department was Gabriel’s pastor.
No government agent can ever – ever – care about a child like his own blood. No government agent can ever have the compassion for that child like a man – or woman – of God.
If we, as society, looked to ourselves as individuals to help Gabriel, Gabriel would still be alive. Instead, we, as a society, have abdicated our personal duty as individuals and given it to the government, as a collective, to look out for children like this poor boy.
The collective works a 40 hour week. The collective goes home at 5:00. The collective punches a clock. A caring person -as an individual – never clocks out. Let us stop shirking our personal responsibilities onto the backs of a soulless collective.
Arguing for more state power over neglected and abused children is not compassionate. It exacerbates the problem.
No government agent is ever ultimately responsible for a child – his family, and by extension his church famiily – is responsible.
<img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/4099162-8759147228584652879?l=www.bluecarp.com' alt='' [...] [...]