The argument boils down to being forced to submit to collectivism under the threat of force. I do not ask government to do anything for my good, or to undertake my responsibilities.
Tell me, if my actions are not based on MY rules and guidelines, can you tell me whose rules and guidelines I pattern my actions after when I peacefully interact with other human beings?
I fail to find in nature, in morality, in the law, where ordinary men who take an oath to no one and who's only power and authority exists at the behest of men also exercising arbitrary power, where police have been blessed with the ability or power to determine who in-fact is good or bad, and then be morally and lawfully entrusted with the authority to treat them in a manner consistent with their "Personal" opinions and "Beliefs".
Some Men and Women, who serve in the capacity of "Peace Officers", are good Men and Women; but it is always the "Individual", and not the office, that does us harm. "Peace Officer" is just a mask, a persona.
It is the people acting in that role that harm us and no amount of pomp or rhetoric can cast evil Men and Women in a noble light because they happen to wear a costume and carry a "Gun or Gavel / Instrument(s) of Peace"
Prior to making MyDeclarations, I have thoroughly researched the circumstances and events giving rise to much of the turmoil, strife, and suffering in our world and this country in particular.
After 32 years on this ball of Godly Mud, even I can see a marked change in society and government.
I believe that higher intuition does not negate our responsibility
Does government dictate to society, or is society antecedent to government?
Is it that government is society's response to its problems, or are the problems in society a result of government?
I do understand and agree with the concept of government. Government admits to man's imperfections profound reverence and awe especially toward God
If everyone were a reasonable, rational, and conscientious individual then government would not be needed.
If a society is comprised of individuals, then who is there to protect themselves against if not irrational, unreasonable individuals? Government is that mutual protection against unreasonable, irrational individuals.
However, once power is established in an institution or body of men, that power is never relinquished unless done so through force of people reclaiming that power. I see more-and-more powerless people and more-and-more powerful institutions.
I see people abandoning their responsibilities in favor of adopting government as their source for reason. This in itself is not necessarily bad, for those submitting to such an existence do so at their own peril and theoretically the damage is limited to those living under maligned authority, but the cancer has metastasized and now infects other societies through conscription, force, and pervasive ignorance.
What recourse does a free man have when he is either to submit to what his conscience identifies as injustice and injury, or to reclaim his place in this world as his own sovereign, beholding to no artificial construct or expedient acting as, or calling itself, a just government?
Rather than wander the maze of deceit, obfuscation, and threats; and when seeking aid from apparently responsive servants am met only with further injury through lies and dissemblance; I am taking myself back to my natural state, fully informed and possessing reason and knowledge, choosing anew where my allegiance will lie and to whom I will submit.
I believe that those in government will either not understand my rationale or reason, since many of them believe that power begins with them, when it is each individual, responsible, and sovereign man and woman that breathes life into their office through their consent.
My consent, if required to be given, is not consent, but homage. If consent is given, it can be retracted. Through all My Declarations , I correct my previous mistakes in giving allegiance, assistance, or energy to, and thereby being bound to support through my labor and property, a government that does not comport with the basic concepts of what government was intended to be;
i.e., an expedient in providing for the mutual protection of the life, liberty, and property of those who consent.)
"That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior to the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent."