The argument about the gamefowl industry comes down to two different opinions held by two opposing sides.
One side holds the opinion that everyone must complly with their opinion and government agencies and Law Enforcement Officers should be used to subjugate Americans that do not agree with their desire to put chickens above human lives.
The other side holds these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and pursuit of happiness and that our government does not have the power to place chickens above our unalienable rights or create a danger to our lives to defend chickens based simply on the opinion of another person or persons.
And that we all have equal rights to our opinions and that our government does not have the authority to grant rights to chickens and deprive rural Oklahomans of our consitutional rights and create a danger to our lives and our family members lives over chickens we are simply trying to harvest the same way they've been harvested for over 3,000 years.
We are not asking and we are not begging. We are stating a fact that we are entitled to our culture, heritage, pursuit of happiness, liberty, agriculture industry, the fruits of our labor, our property, our dignity, civil rights, human rights, and our constitutional rights to harvest our livestock and earn a living in our attempt to provide for our families in rural Oklahoma and that our elected officials are not upholding their oath to support and defend our constitutional rights and freedoms.
That these same elected officials by apathy and dereliction of duty to their oath of office are supporting the destruction of the U.S. Constitution by well funded special interest organizations and affluent politically and socially connected elitists that place a higher value on their opinions than the rural Oklahomans that are being deprived of our constitutional rights and freedoms and may be killed as our legislators hope to find favor with their senior party leaders who are kissing the "rings" of these arrogant elitists.
U.S. Army ret SFC B.L. Cozad Jr
THE LAW by Frederic Bastiat. WEe ask our legislators to please educate yourselves to the truth of your duty and responsiblity to support and defend every persons constitutional rights.
Law Is Justice
Law is justice. In this proposition a simple and enduring government can be conceived. And I defy anyone to say how even the thought of revolution, of insurrection, of the slightest uprising could arise against a government whose organized force was confined only to suppressing injustice.
Under such a regime, there would be the most prosperity— and it would be the most equally distributed. As for the sufferings that are inseparable from humanity, no one would even think of blaming the government for them. This is true because, if the force of government were limited to suppressing injustice, then government would be as innocent of these sufferings as it is now innocent of changes in the temperature.
As proof of this statement, consider this question: Have the people ever been known to rise against the Court of Appeals, or mob a Justice of the Peace, in order to get higher wages, free credit, tools of production, favorable tariffs, or government-created jobs?Everyone knows perfectly well that such matters are not within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals or a Justice of the Peace. And if government were limited to its proper functions, everyone would soon learn that these matters are not within the jurisdiction of the law itself.
But make the laws upon the principle of fraternity--- proclaim that all good, and all bad, stem from the law; that the l.iw is impossible for all individual misfortunes and all social inequalities---then the door is open to an endless succession of complaints, irritations,troubles, and revolutions.
Justice Means Equal Rights
Law is justice. And it would indeed be strange if law could properly be anything else! Is not justice right? Are not rights equal? By what right does the law force me to conform to the social plans of Mr. Mimerel, Mr. de Melun, Mr.Thiers, or Mr. louis Blanc? If the law has a moral right to do this, why does it not, then, force these gentlemen to submit to my plans? Is it logical to suppose that nature has not given me sufficient imagination to dream up a Utopia also? Should the law choose one fantasy among many, and put the organized force of government at its service only?
Law is justice. And let it not be said—as it continually is said— that under this concept, the law would be atheistic, individualistic, and heartless; that it would make mankind in its own image. This is an absurd conclusion, worthy only of those worshippers of government who believe that the law is mankind.
Nonsense! Do those worshippers of government believe that free persons will cease to act? Does it follow that if we receive no energy from the law, we shall receive no energy at all? Does it follow that if the law is restricted to the function of protecting the free use of our faculties, we will be unable to use our faculties? Suppose that the law does not force us to follow certain forms of religion, or systems of association, or methods of education, or regulations of labor, or regulations of trade, or plans for charity; does it then follow that we shall eagerly plunge into atheism, hermitary, ignorance, misery, and greed? If we are free, does it follow that we shall no longer recognize the power and goodness of God? Does itfollow that we shall then cease to associate with each other, to help each other, to love and succor our unfortunate brothers to study the secrets of nature, and to strive to improve ourselves to the best of our abilities?
Freedom, Dignity, and Progress
Law is justice. And it is under the law of justice—under the reign of right; under the influence of liberty, safety, stability, and responsibility—that every person will attain his real worth and the true dignity of his being. It is only under this law of justice that mankind will achieve—slowly, no doubt, but certainly—God's design for the orderly and peaceful progress of humanity.
It seems to me that this is theoretically right, for whatever the question under discussion—whether religious, philosophical, political, or economic; whether it concerns prosperity, morality, equality, right, justice, progress, responsibility, cooperation, property, labor, trade, capital, wages, taxes, population, finance, or government—at whatever point on the scientific horizon I begin my researches, I invariably reach this one conclusion: The solution to the problems of human relationships is to be found in liberty.
And does not experience prove this? Look at the entire world. Which countries contain the most peaceful, the most moral, and the happiest people? Those people are found in thecountries where the law least interferes with private affairs; where government is least felt; where the individual has the greatest scope, and free opinion the greatest influence; where administrative powers are fewest and simplest; where taxes are lightest and most nearly equal, and popular discontent the least excited and the least justifiable; where individuals and groups most actively assume their responsibilities, and, consequently, where the morals of admittedly imperfect human beings are constantly improving; where trade, assemblies, and associations are the least restricted; where labor, capital, and populations suffer the fewest forced displacements; where mankind most nearly follows its own natural inclinations; where the inventions of men are most nearly in harmony with the laws of God; in short, the happiest, most moral, and most peaceful people are those who most nearly follow thisprinciple: Although mankind is not perfect, still, all hope rests upon the free and voluntary actions of persons within the limits of right; law or force is to be used for nothing except the administration of universal justice.
Do Not Claim to Know More than God
This must be said: There are too many "great" men in the world—legislators, organizers, do-gooders, leaders of the people, fathers of nations, and so on, and so on. Too many persons place themselves above mankind; they make a career of organizing it,patronizing it, and ruling it.
Now someone will say: "You yourself are doing this very thing."
True. But it must be admitted that I act in an entirely different sense; if I have joined the ranks of the reformers, it is solely for the purpose of persuading them to leave people alone. I do not look upon people as Vancauson looked upon his automaton. Rather, just as the physiologist accepts the human body as it is, so do I accept people as they are. I desire only to study and admire.
My attitude toward all other persons is well illustrated by this story from a celebrated traveler: He arrived one day in the midst of a tribe of savages, where a child had just been born. A crowd of soothsayers, magicians, and quacks—armed with rings, hooks, and cords—surrounded it. One said: "This child will never smell the perfume of a peace-pipe unless I stretch his nostrils ."Another said: "He will never be able to hear unless I draw his ear-lobes down to his shoulders." A third said: "He will never see the sunshine unless I slant his eyes." Another said: "He will never stand upright unless I bend his legs." A fifth said: "He will never learn to think unless I flatten his skull."
"Stop," cried the traveler. "What God does is well done. Do not claim to know more than He. God has given organs to this frail creature; let them develop and grow strong by exercise, use, experience, and liberty."
Let Us Now Try Liberty!
God has given to men all that is necessary for them to accomplish their destinies. He has provided a social form as well as a human form. And these social organs of persons are so constituted that they will develop themselves harmoniously in the clean air of liberty. Away, then, with quacks and organizers! Away with their rings, chains, hooks, and pincers! Away with their artificialsystems! Away with the whims of governmental administrators, their socialized projects, their centralization, their tariffs, their government schools, their state religions, their free credit, their bank monopolies, their regulations, their restrictions, their equalization by taxation, and their pious moralizations!
And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works.
The Wisdom of Frederic Bastiat
Politics
I cannot legitimately force my fellow men to be industrious, sober, thrifty, generous, learned, or pious; but I can force them to be just.
For the same reason, the collective force cannot be legitimately employed to foster the love of labor, sobriety, thrift, generosity, learning, religious faith; but it can be legitimately employed to further the rule of justice, to defend every man'srights.
“HSUS has demonstrated an ability to destroy the image of so many wonderful and caring people. They have deceived the American public. It feeds on itself and builds on itself. They can orchestrate the confiscation of your animals. They can sue you, destroy you and take away your freedom to own animals that you have cared for and loved your entire life. They can force you to deplete all your resources to defend yourself. They are like the school yard bully. They are so successful because they have an obscene amount of money. They have a propaganda and lobbying machine unlike anything else,” warns Frank Losey, an attorney for dog breeders who has been active in fighting HSUS abuse of non-profit status, most recently in the Missouri Proposition B effort.