It only stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there's service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master. Ayn Rand
155 years ago, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of slavery, in one of the darkest moments in American history. Last week, the United States Supreme Court ruled again in favor of slavery -- more subtly, of course.
Pamela Geller, PJ Media, July 4, 2012
Back in 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that forever changed the course of human history. Infamously known as the Dred Scott Decision, the U.S. SCOTUS ruled, according to Wikipedia, that states that outlawed slavery could not forbid slaveowners from bringing slaves into their states and holding them as slaves there. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote that blacks were “beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”
This was a shocking violation of the founding principle of our great republic, individual rights. Clearly this was motivated by personal subjectivity and partisan politics. And here we are again, courtesy Chief Justice John Roberts.
The issue of slavery was always a contentious issue that our Founding Fathers battled with and only acquiesced to the South’s demands when it became painfully clear that there would be no United States of America if they banished slavery. The thinking, of course, was that it would be determined at a future date. And it was. It was bloodily and brutally settled with the Civil War.
Judge Roberts’ decision will have the same deleterious outcome. His unconstitutional decision on Obamacare mandates the slavery of the American people to the U.S. Government, forcing us to make decisions about our health care in accord with government fiat. And the taxes will prove to be so prohibitive as to enslave the people and make all productive Americans wards of the Federal Government. “To be a socialist,” said Josef Goebbels, “is to submit the I to the Thou. Socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole.” Is that not what Obama is doing?
“Socialism,” said Ayn Rand, “is the doctrine that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that his life and his work do not belong to him, but belong to society, that the only justification of his existence is his service to society, and that society may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.” Obamacare mandates exactly that: the productive exist for the aid of the non-productive, and all must change their behavior to conform with what the state prescribes as the good.
Roberts’ decision, like Taney’s, will not be without consequences. I fear that it will result in rage and the blind violence of a civil war. The American people cannot be cowed into resignation, submission, or passivity. As Ayn Rand said: “Defiance, not obedience, is the Americans’ answer to overbearing authority. The Nation that ran an Underground Railroad to help human beings escape from slavery, or began drinking on principle in the face of Prohibition, will not say ‘Yes, sir,’ to the enforcers” of socialized medicine. Not yet, anyway.
“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” Roberts wrote. It is not his job to make that determination. It is his job to determine the Constitutionality of particular laws. The only good thing that can be taken away from the Dred Scott Decision was that they ruled, for the very first time, that an act of Congress was unconstitutional – so a precedent had been set, even if it was a horrible decision. Obamacare undermines and nullifies states’ rights, much the way the Dred Scott Decision did.
It gets better. Go here, read the whole thing.