Back Into the Fire

For a while now, I have avoided national politics. I’m simply bored by the constant insane cult show. I have subscribed to all the local political newsletters I can find, though, and I have recently had folks from the Federalist party of Florida reach out to me. They seem nice enough and totes professional, so here’s hoping. I told them I was interested.

I’ve had some concerns with these guys as a national party, but if they really do live out what they claim, then a lot of the issues that polarize political discussion go away as national issues, which would be a blessed relief.

Think of it — if a state wants censor boards (say for movies), it can have them. This was struck down in ’68 by the Warren court. Agree or disagree, if the people in a state want this, let them have it! What skin is it off the noses of Missourians if Montanans want state censor boards, or state churches, or whatever. Again, this brings responsibility down to a state level where it needs to be anyways.

Me, I will fight tooth and nail for where I live to promote a culture of life, for the unborn, for the elderly, for everyone. I think a state that wants to prosper should forbid violence to its defenseless as well as exploitation of the vulnerable, and should in no way fund those who profit off such vile behaviors. That means my state may look different than the state next door, and that’s fine, because my circle of responsibility is small and my influence only goes so far. I think federalism understands this and so views man in his true light. It respects him as a moral agent, and fights for his liberties in a way that libertarianism never did, because libertarianism never understood nor respected the nature of man.

My plan is also to fight, tooth and nail, to promote a culture of family. That means that the state will not honor nor promote so-called homosexual “marriage”, because it is both evil and cruel to reward people in their sexual dysfunction. For a state to exist in the future, it must have citizens, well-adjusted and moral citizens, and homosexual marriage does not produce any of these; it is physically incapable of reproducing itself. Marriage is sacred, and thus, important. The state should reward people for marrying, even producing offspring.

Now whatever policies businesses have for hiring, or insurance companies have for coverage, is up to them. If there is a market for homosexual partner benefits, then they will meet it if they want. If they don’t, then that too is their choice. Let the market decide and let the buyers and sellers assume the responsibility. If there is no compelling state interest, then laissez faire prevails.

Federalism also means that the bonds that unite us will be fewer, but stronger. America will be America again, a union of states, and not a suprastate. That means that there will be political and spiritual diversity, which is oddly enough, what some people say they want. Yet, as we all know, the very same people stomp out differences wherever they arise if they don’t like them. More freedom is always better, not worse, for everyone involved.

Anyhow, as I figure this will set off some involvement in national politics, back into the fire I go. However, this will be limited, as my focus is local and state, to help build a party based on natural rights.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s