Wednesday, September 30, 2009


Let's define our terms.

LIBERTY: autonomy: immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority: political independence; freedom of choice; personal freedom from servitude or confinement or oppression.

Autonomy: Ancient Greek: αυτονόμος autonomos, Modern Greek: αυτονομία autonomia, from auto "self" + nomos, "law": immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority: political independence.

Immunity :unsusceptibility: the state of not being susceptible; the quality of being unaffected by something.

Arbitrary: Based on individual discretion or judgment; Unrestrained by law; tyrannical; Determined by impulse rather than reason.

Statesman Patric Henry knew LIBERTY would not come easy to this new nation-to-be.

He said, "The battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, Sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable; and let it come! I repeat, Sir, let it come!"

He knew that he knew that some things are worth fighting for, LIBERTY being chief among them.

The Father of Our Country, George Washington proclaimed, " fervent supplications to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe and Sovereign Arbiter of Nations that His providential care may still be extended to the United States, that the virtue and happiness of the people may be preserved, and that the Government which they have instituted for the protection of their LIBERTIES may be perpetual." [Washington's final annual message to congress - december 7, 1796...(caps mine).]

From the website, The American Revolution HERE, we read: "It is important to remember that several people contributed to the events surrounding the American Revolution. Many think that there were a minimum of 100 people who if they had not been born, we may still be subjects of the British Crown. Many of these individuals are not seen in the same vein as people like George Washington or Thomas Jefferson, but those two would be the first to admit that the success of the "great experiment" was the result of thousands of people who laid their life on the line for a specific purpose. Freedom..."

People like: John Adams; George Washington; Thomas Jefferson; James Madison; James Monroe; Samuel Adams; John Hancock; Patrick Henry; Thomas Paine; Paul Revere; Richard Henry Lee; John Dickinson; Benedict Arnold; John Paul Jones; Nathanael Greene; John Jay; Henry Knox; William Prescott; Dr. Joseph Warren; Francis Lightfoot Lee; Ethan Allen; James Wilson; Benjamin Rush; John Quincy Adams and so many others gave both their time and their lives for the causes of LIBERTY.

So, how does this LIBERTY thing play out in your life?

How much stock do you put in LIBERTY?

Is LIBERTY just a passing fad?

Were the men and women who set forth this nation "...conceived in LIBERTY..." all fools?

Has the idea of LIBERTY seen its day?

Is it time that the words of Abraham Lincoln, "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." be abandoned?

Which of your LIBERTIES are you willing to give up "for the good of the whole?"

Can you make me a list of them?

As for me, I will take my stand with Patrick Henry: "...GIVE ME LIBERTY, OR GIVE ME DEATH!"

I am ready, willing and able to fight to the death for LIBERTY, as did my forefathers.

Are you?


Z said...

You know, Joe...I'm thinkin' it just might come down to that. Are we ready? I THINK SO.
Meanwhile, the world's laughing at our new president's foibles and how much weaker we're getting as the infighting gets so bad that we'll never be able to give a strong front against anything from the outside. And, INSIDE, some Americans can't even TELL good from bad let alone fight the bad.
And, with those happy little words, I"ll slink back to my place.

good post, Joey. xxx

Dan said...

This is a thought provoking post. As a student of history I am well aware of man's bloody propensity to engage in war. Such a propensity appears to have been held at bay-at least on any large scale-for over a half century. Considering that that half century held the whole of my life's experience, coupled with the feminization I received in government schools, the drive experienced in the hearts of the men that drove them to storm the beaches of Normandy, or march into the fire at Marye's Heights, has always been perplexing to me.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the next century will be even bloodier than the last as we prove that pretending that the heart of man is basically good does not make it so. This pretension has been a luxury of the west in the order of the luxuries of men living high on credit. The west has been doing both, and are now doubling down on both, as can clearly be seen in current foreign and fiscal policies.

On our current trek, for those who's worldveiw is based in reality, we are obviously on a collision course with a bloody referendum where we will learn two things about the tensions that exist between man's desire to control his fellow, and his desire to be free from those controls: those who scream that "war is not the answer" only intend that those words apply to their enemies, and freedom isn't free.

As for me, the hearts of the men that drove them to march into almost certain death on the battlefields of history is becoming less perplexing day by day.