The Cliven Bundy case
January 10. 2018 11:43PM
To the Editor: It seems to me that the main premise was never tried: That the government usurped and revoked, without due process, the traditional grazing rights going back three generations or more of ranchers on public lands, thus making the legal illegal in one stroke. Something was lost of rights devolving to the people.
There was seemingly no recourse for the plaintiffs, the common-law practice of petitioning for rights having long been discarded. The government can take away our rights by simply redefining, explicitly or implicitly, what the right is, and by adding to or subtracting from the rights already inherent to mankind. Any branch of government can do it at any level. The Founding Fathers were right. Without a strong religious sense defining right and wrong, democracy is simply partisanship, tyranny by the majority. And the republic simply puts the decision in others’ hands, rather than yours. This is the arrogance of government in a statist society. Confiscating a family’s livelihood is simply un-American.
And in another case, the government will take away your license (rights, privileges, livelihood, etc.) if you don’t use a computer or some other gizmo.
The state will always use force to obtain compliance for arbitrary laws not based on tradition, natural law, and inherited rights.
An unjust or immoral law is no law at all.