We hold that the Constitution denies government the power to take from the individual either his life, liberty, or property except in accordance with moral law; that the same moral law which governs the actions of men when acting alone is also applicable when they act in concert with others; that no citizen or group of citizens has any right to direct their agent, the government to perform any act which would be evil or offensive to the conscience if that citizen were performing the act himself outside the framework of government.
Government cannot deprive one of life, liberty and property, just as an individual cannot.
“…a government is nothing more or less than a relatively small group of citizens who have been hired, in a sense, by the rest of us to perform certain functions and discharge certain responsibilities which have been authorized. It stands to reason that the government itself has no innate power or privilege to do anything. Its only source of authority and power is from the people who have created it.” – Ezra Taft Benson, “The Proper Role of Government”
“If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” – James Madison, (The Federalist, No. 51)
“The proper function of government is limited only to those spheres of activity within which the individual citizen has the right to act. By deriving its just powers from the governed, government becomes primarily a mechanism for defense against bodily harm, theft and involuntary servitude. It cannot claim the power to redistribute the wealth or force reluctant citizens to perform acts of charity against their will. Government is created by man. No man possesses such power to delegate. The creature cannot exceed the creator.” – Ezra Taft Benson, “The Proper Role of Government”
“Assume, for example, that we were farmers, and that we received a letter from the government telling us that we were going to get a thousand dollars this year for ploughed up acreage. But rather than the normal method of collection, we were to take this letter and collect $69.71 from Bill Brown, at such an address, and $82.47 from Henry Jones, $59.80 from a Bill Smith, and so on down the line; that these men would make up our farm subsidy. Neither you nor I, Nor would 99 percent of the farmers, walk up and ring a man’s doorbell, hold out a hand and say, “Give me what You’ve earned even though I have not.” We simply wouldn’t do it because we would be facing directly the violation of moral law, “Thou shalt not steal.” In short, we would be held accountable for our actions.” – James R. Evens, The Glorious Quest
“How is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime…” – Frederick Bastiat, (The Law, p. 26)
As quoted by George Washington, “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence-it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master!” Yet conflict arises when moral laws conflicts with governmental laws. Thomas Jefferson sheds light on this dilemma by saying “Whenever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.”
In his forward to Frederick Bastiat’s 1850 masterpiece, “The Law”, Sheldon Richman explains further:
“A society based on a proper conception of law would be orderly and prosperous. But unfortunately, some will choose plunder over production if the former requires less effort than the latter. A grave danger arises when the class of people who make the law (legislation) turns to plunder. The result, Bastiat writes, is “lawful plunder.” At first, only the small group of lawmakers practice legal plunder. But that may set in motion a process in which the plundered classes, rather than seeking to abolish the perversion of law, instead strive to get in on it… The result of generalized legal plunder is moral chaos, precisely because law and morality have been set at odds. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law.”
“I dread nothing so much as the exercise of ungranted and doubtful powers by this Government. It is, in my opinion, the danger of dangers to the future of this country. Let us be sure that we keep it always within its limits. If this great, ambitious, ever-growing corporation becomes aggressive, who shall check it? If it becomes wayward, who shall control it? If it becomes unjust, who shall trust it? As sentinels of the country’s watchtower, I beseech you to watch and guard with sleepless dread that corporation which can make all property and rights, all states and people, and all liberty and hope, its playthings in an hour, and its victims forever.” – Statesman Benjamin Hill of Georgia, 1878
Members of the Independent American Party, along with other Americans, have been faced with these “cruel alternatives”. We choose to be aggressively involve ourselves in reform-an effort to bring this country back to the original intent of our Founding Fathers by persuading other Americans of the serious threats to our American Constitutional Republic.
These threats are not only upon principles to which our Country has been founded, but threats to the very essence of liberty as given to man by God.