PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL LAW: We Have A Duty To Each Other To Restrain Our Desires

With the ‘Gay’ Marriage ruling in the news, it is a good time to explain that, under Natural Law, we have a duty to every member of our society.  It is inherent in the Social Contract.  We know this Social Contract as the U.S. and State Constitutions.  The problem for the majority of us today is that we openly violate these contracts, and in so doing, we shirk our duties under them.  For one, we have a duty to know and understand that we have duties under these contracts, but how many of us understand this, let alone accept the corresponding responsibilities?  I dare say that all the majority of us see are the words “pursuit of happiness” and assume that this means we are free to do as we will.  Some among us — those who are intellectually honest enough to realize they need some rationalization for pursuing a life of licentiousness — have tried to create a ‘live-and-let-live’ philosophy they call ‘Libertarianism.’  But the fatal flaw in all of this is that they all — even the supposedly principled ‘Libertarians’ — they all shirk their inherent responsibilities to each other under Natural Law and the Social Contract.

The first thing we need to understand is that the reference to ‘happiness’ in the Declaration of Independence was not a claim to have a right to do whatever we want that makes us happy.  It is not a right to licentiousness, but this is what many of us have taken it to mean.  Even those who claim to love and support the Constitution have twisted the meaning of our founders words.  This is because we have neglected our duties to teach our children and to learn as children.  Had we kept these responsibilities to each other, we might still remember that, to our founders, the term ‘pursuit of happiness’ was a legal term meaning the pursuit of the ‘good’ or moral and virtuous life:

The Pursuit of Happiness Under Natural Law

But now it is time for the ‘tough love’ in this post to begin.  Our founders understood that society is actually a fragile thing.  The glue that binds it is either out-right force — in which case it is not so much a society as it is slavery — or a common adherence to the universal moral laws.  They were very clear in asserting that, without a moral society, we could have no lasting liberty:

“Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

–John Adams, October 11, 1798

And while most people might begrudgingly accept this, it was the other part of this equation — which our founders also understood — that happens to be the part modern America rejects:

“Indeed moral virtue is substantially and essentially enforced by the precepts of Christianity, and may be considered to be the basis of it. But in addition to moral principles, the Christian doctrines inculcate a purity of heart and holiness of life which constitute its chief glory. When we contemplate it in this light, we have a most striking evidence of its superiority over all the systems of pagan philosophy, which were promulgated by the wisest men of ancient times.”

— Zephaniah Swift, founding father and State Supreme Court Justice

That’s correct: the founders believed and forcefully asserted that there is no liberty without morality, and no morality without religion:

In the Founders’ Words: the Essential Role of Religion in Public and Civic Life

But today, people claim there is a separation of Church and State and that our founders did not set the country up as a Theocracy.  These are actually the primary arguments behind the notion of ‘Libertarianism,’ which tries to create a rational argument for universal morality without the necessity to appeal to God in the process.  The problem with this is it cannot be done.  Where morality is concerned, an appeal to God is a necessary fallacy.  The fact that the Libertarians do not understand the flaw in their thinking is telling in itself: it indicates they pursue self over society and their duties to it.

PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL LAW: Rand and Libertarians Reject the Key Element of Liberty

But there are those who reject any connection to God, His laws or even the attempt to rationalize a moral code without God.  They simply want to do what they want to do and expect the laws to protect their claims to their licentious lifestyle.  Worse, many of them expect the law to finance their licentiousness.  These are the people we hear objecting to ‘theocracy,’ but they are ignorant of what their words even mean.  They are ignorant because they are among those who have most neglected their duty to learn.

Misunderstandings of the Difference between ‘Secular’ and ‘Theocracy’

This brings us to the people who claim they have a ‘right’ to ‘gay’ marriage.  They do not!  The Supreme Court that claims it has the authority to change the meaning of words and create law where there is none.  They do not!  To the President who thinks he has the power to make law, ignore his duty to enforce law and to change the nation through decree.  He does not!  To the Congress which thinks it has authority to write law while exempting itself, and to plunder the wealth of the nation to buy perpetual lordship from the voters who constantly hold out their hands demanding what they did not earn.  It does not!  And finally, to each of us who lie, steal, cheat, and run around living a sexually immoral life.  To those of us who neglect our children and their education, leaving them to be raised by electronic screens and the propagandists in the public schools.  To all of us who think that these things do not harm anyone, and who do not say anything for fear of the PC backlash we know is sure to follow.  All of us — from the top down — have turned our backs on our duties under the Social Contract, yet every one of us is demanding that our ‘rights’ be protected.  Well, I have news for America: you must first attend to your duties before you can make any claim to your rights.  Either keep your end of the contract, or give up any claim to the rewards that come from it.

The thing that this society has forgotten is that there is no such thing as a private vs. public morality.  If you are immoral in your private life — when no one is looking — that is who you are — period!  Any pretense of being ‘good’ in public is just a lie; which is a continuation of the immoral you.  What’s more, the slippery slope is real, and we are seeing it in action all over the world.  The trouble in Greece is the result of people ignoring their moral obligations to each other and their children.  they have spent beyond their means.  they had a duty to their debtors and their children, as well as to the wealthier in their nation they rationalized stealing from because they thought “the wealthy don;t pay their fair share.’  All lies continued from their immoral souls.  Now we are doing the very same thing in spades.

The ‘gay’ marriage agenda is no different.  They claim they are born the way they are, so they have a ‘right’ to not only marry, but also have children.  By what act of nature does a gay couple have children?  Well, if it does not happen in nature, then you do not have a right to itperiod!  This is the essence of Natural Law.  But it goes farther that this.  While many gays think they should be able to do as they want, and that this means they are justified in forcing society to accept them as ‘normal,’ they draw the line at accepting pedophiles as ‘normal.’  Well, ‘science’ aside, the majority of Americans considers homosexuality to be immoral, so if the gays think they are justified in forcing the majority to accept immorality, then who are they to object to the pedophiles doing the same thing to them?  And it doesn’t just stop there.  We have the governments of this nation facilitating sexual activity among 13-year-old children through our schools, where they provide free ‘how-to’ classes under the guise of ‘sex ed.,’ and contraception and even abortion — all without parental permission.

No normal person can look at our society and deny the effects of this ‘progressive’ step-by-step march toward the normalization of licentiousness.  Anyone who does not see how far down the slope of immorality we’ve fallen has gone over the edge and is free-falling into the abyss of total depravity.  We have become “A Brave New World,” and it is not for the better.  What’s more, it is our fault — each and every one of us.  Yes, I will start by raising my hand and admitting I am guilty.  I have neglected my duty to protect you and your family from this decay, but then you need to face reality and raise your hand and admit the same because we are all guilty — each and every one of us.

7 thoughts on “PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL LAW: We Have A Duty To Each Other To Restrain Our Desires

  1. Joe,

    One word, SELF!

    We have become a nation of what I want, what do I desire to please myself. Why should I rely on God for guidance as to what is best for me. I can do it on my own.

    Today a lot of churchs and the supposed men of God are right there with them with a healt & wealth message. When is the last time they heard a sermon that actually forced them to their knees and ask God for forgiveness. Those old time churchs with solid biblical teaching are closing by the 100’s every year.

    Unless we die to self and serve God on our own free will as a true servant (willing slave) then we will never become true friends of God.

    This is what we are missing today in the body of Christ in this country. We can pray for revival and do our part to repent and ask God for mercy and spare this nation from his judgement. Sans this prophecy will continue its march forward.

    What John Adams said in the quote above comes down to pride in ones self. As past history has shown it has the power to destroy nations. I fear we are next.

    Keep up the good words of warning.

    1. Chhelo,

      I can’t NOT keep it up. God has been compelling me to write lately. If I try not to, His fire burns me up inside. So, expect more. I’m just waiting for His next command to write 🙂

  2. ” By what act of nature does a gay couple have children?”

    Easy. Artificial insemination. Children from a hetero marriage that went sour. Adoption. You say “nature” but we drive cars, use credit cards, write silly articles like this one. Is any of that “natural”?

    As for having children in general, look up the virgin birth, and then get back to me. I’m sure you’ll claim it was God’s will, God can do anything, etc., but you know what? Theological arguments are holding less and less water as more and more people cease to need some imaginary sky deity to rule them.

    1. Swing and a miss;

      1 — you just said “ARTIFICIAL,” which is an admission that it is not an act of nature 🙂

      2 — Adoption? Again, not a gay couple ‘having’ children; it is a gay couple acquiring children.

      I understand you will not understand this, but the only ‘silliness’ here is in YOUR reasoning. You are — as with the entire gay agenda — trying to force changes to the natural order of things. It does not work. True, you can sweep water up hill, but only for a short time. Eventually, it gets away from you and things re-set.

      Finally, this applies to God, too. More and more people are claiming they do not need God, but it is only because more and more people are renouncing the use of reason in favor of their own delusions. Again, you can push this pile up hill only so long. However, in this case, when God finally has enough, He will destroy the nation that opposes Him. he always has, and He always will. When that happens…

      Well, we’ll see how well your way of thinking works under Islamic rule 🙂

    2. Kieron,

      The answer to this question : ” By what act of nature does a gay couple have children?”, which you attempted to answer by deflection is indeed Easy as you yourself said in your first word-sentence.

      Let me finish it for you with the real, True and obvious answer.

      Easy, there is no natural way for a gay couple to have any children. Even leaving God out of the equation for sake of argument, Nature does not allow nor provide for any mechanism of procreation involving two males only or two females only. As that by definition is “un-Natural”. Genetics rears its head against you and your argument.

      Irrespective of “sky dieties” or “rainbow Flags”….or hateful f@gs for that matter.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s