I had not intended to post this morning. I intended to post on Friday on a cultural issue, but I think I need to post this little essay first.
What is the basis of law? I hold that all rational law is based on morality. Many people from atheists or agnostic types to Christians who identify as libertarian, try to talk about a “natural law” that exists without the necessity of a god to start it. This is foolishness.
For a law to be more than one man’s tyrannical decree, it must have a basis higher than man. To have an clear, unchanging, and authoritative moral code requires a superhuman to draft it for man. Without a deity, there is no neutral and unbiased standard for morality.
As such, all law requires a god. I hold that the God of the Bible is the one true deity, and that he has given us his moral standards in the pages of the Bible. This just happens to be the position of most of America’s Founders, and western civilization.
Those among the patriot movement and libertarianism who speak of a universal natural law irrespective of what if any god one believes to exist –have set themselves up for failure.
One example of this sort of thing is a book that I saw, but did not purchase. It dealt with liberty and common law. It had a section on the “agreement” between parent and child. Seriously. Christians, and until recently the U.S. government, held that a child was the gift of God to his parents. The child is not property; he is a responsibility from God. The child is a human with right to life, unlike an animal that may be disposed of. But the child is under the absolute authority of his parents, who: discipline him as they see fit (including spanking), feed and clothe him as they see proper, and give him a basic education.
While they may spank or switch him- they cannot beat, kill, or sexually abuse this child. No human has the right to do this to another, regardless of familial connection. The child is under his parent’s authority, except in areas that violate the law of God.
Godly parents will love and care for their children, and raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. When the child reaches legal adulthood, he may live as he sees fit. If their parents raised them properly, they will usually follow them.
But at no point is there an “agreement” between parent and child. There is an understanding of God given patriarchal authority. This is a huge difference.
While I hold that God given morality is the basis of just law, I am not a Christian Reconstructionist. The Reconstructionist position, which I wrote an essay about in my March 2016 book Putnam Liberty Notes, has a solid base but several significant flaws. Though a flawed position, Christian Reconstruction is less flawed than the humanistic philosophy of many patriots and libertarians.
Are there victimless sins? Yes. Are there victimless crimes? I am not sure. In the past I would have said no.
The various patriot, conservative, libertarian, and alt-right factions are often not even on the same page on basic propositions –as in this case.
On an end note, let me clarify that my mourning for the massive red oak in yesterday’s post was not tree hugging environmentalism. I believe man has benevolent dominion over the earth, and I live in a house with wood framing and a woodstove. I have cut trees down. I was only mourning because this was an unnecessary cutting of nice old trees, what the late John Denver might call “more scars upon the land”.
I will try to have my culture post written and posted no later than Saturday morning. Thanks for being along for the ride with my multifaceted musings on this blog.
Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.