An old Roman saying is "Leges sine Moribus est vanae". Translated this mean that laws without morals are vain/useless. If only the hired help in Austin and the Imperial City would heed the teachings from such old sayings. Given that the Roman empire lasted for many years, they learned what worked and what did not work. Sadly, many of our officials seek the accouterments and architecture of the imperators but do not heed the warnings of those who went through those times.
The saying has a plethora of meanings. One is that the only person who benefits from laws passed without morals is the legislator who passed it. It gives them the vanity of having passed legislation although in reality it is useless. If the law was based on a moral, then why did they need the law anyway? Governing by regulation is nothing more than vanity. The CONgress Critters enjoy the press they receive for their laws, but their efforts do not change the behaviors of the people. Much of the recent legislation is not about morals, it is about changing the lifestyles of people.
Some recent examples include:
1) Conyers hate speech bill Hate Speech Bill . Such legislation turns free speech into a punishable offense. It does not have any moral base. It is nothing more than a form of cultural marxism. It focuses on reshaping society, not preserving morals. This is a prime example of ‘malum prohibitum‘ legislation. Is it any wonder that in Nazi Germany the laws focused on changing the words allowed in speech prior to Hitler’s nightmare. Besides all that it also ‘federalizes’ local activity. It gives the federales the power to patrol local areas.
2) The reintroduction of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Such legislation is pointless. Like my wife says, "There is nothing I can not do out there that some law is going to allow now". She is right. Since equal freedoms exist, what is the point in re-fighting a battle from 30 years ago? I guess Ted Kennedy and his comrades want to finally win a legislative battle since those who opposed them are now gone. Of course given his womanizing, perhaps he is doing penance for Chappaquiddick and other episodes.
3) This is almost as bad as Texas State Senator Rodney Ellis’ attempts (and those in other Southern states) at getting Texas to apologize for slavery. Who will they apologize to? What about the indentured slaves from Scotland? What about the enslaved Indians? What about how the Indians enslaved the early Spainards? I guess that Senator Ellis in his wisdom has already considered the plight of those men. Since he has done that, which group will the apology be issued to and who does the legislature speak for? Did the Karankawas elect Ellis and company to speak -No! The Mexican bandit Juan Cortina killed off the last of them long ago. Will the apology be issued to the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh? I have my doubts. Such efforts are VANITY, pure and simple. It makes for good press in the papers. Since your opponents are dead men from decades before, it makes for an easy victory.
4) It is ironic that the Attorney General is now embroiled in the teen boy sex episode, when the priority for investigation of the Justice Department is pornography and they downplay enforce immigration violations. The strange turn of events is bizarre to say the least. After his plaque episode in Austin, I did not trust his judgments or opinions. He disregarded the law, morals and heritage then. Since the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, I did not expect him to rise to a higher moral level after that episode. I recognize that as Attorney General he can hire and fire whomever he wishes and on his own whim. That is the prerogative of being in power. Clinton did what he wished and now Bush II is doing what he wishes. My concern is the priorities carried out by the AG’s Department of Justice. I did not like Janet Reno’s priorities of chasing after people at Ruby Ridge and Waco, nor do I like Gonzales’ preferences of not enforcing immigration laws. The priorities and the choices made by the people in this position are very telling.
During the ‘Pax Romana’ the restless conquered peoples were kept in line by having their children held hostage. It was seen as a tragedy that someone else raised and educated their children. In 2007 many parents welcome sending their children to indoctrination centers. In Pax Romana, people were distracted by entertainment and taxes. In 2007, many live in subdivisions that are little more than debt concentration camps, and are entertained by Hollywood to keep their minds off of what the Empire is doing. The parallels between the Roman empire and the American empire are astounding, even down to the tactics used on the populace. National policy is evaluated in terms of what works, not whether it is godly or righteous.
In a Southern nation, there would be laws. The focus would be on respecting morals and making laws with a moral base. There would be a return to sanity and moral soundness for the laws. An emphasis would be on doing the right thing, morally and Biblically. The current crop of CONgress Critters evaluate laws in terms of what gets them re-elected, what gets them money and what gives them prestige. Such a recipe sets the stage for fascism to flourish by making pragmatism the ultimate goal.
Free Dixie, Not Iraq!
J. Murrah
No TagsIf you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
