THE CITIZEN CONTRACT IS NOT VOLUNTARY
In his essays on the PHILOSOPHY OF LAW AND GOVERNMENT (http://www.joelskousen.com/Philosophy/philosophy.html), Skousen makes much of the claim that his proposed Citizen Contract is voluntary. He says that all citizens have agreed voluntarily to the Citizen Contract which lays out in detail the “Fundamental Rights” and the “Corollary Rights”. The Fundamental Rights notably include the Right to Life starting at conception. Thus abortion is murder and is prosecuted and punished as murder.
The idea that the Citizen Contract is voluntary is nonsense. Legally it is what is called an “adhesion contract”. Or a “standard form contract”. An “adhesion contract” is a contract where one party is very big and the other party is very small. The big party writes the contract. The small party gets to take it or leave it. There is no negotiating.
In his system, Skousen intentionally creates strong motivation for people to become citizens. The rights of those who are not citizens are substantially less than the rights of citizens. This makes the Citizen Contract even less voluntary.
The U.S. Declaration of Independence says that governments “derive their just powers from the consent of the governed”. It is certainly not true that government gets its power from the consent of the governed. If this were true, then no tyranny could survive. All of us are born into a society which already has a government. We are not consulted about the form of government or about the content of the laws that govern us. This basic truth is not altered by the fact that we get to vote in elections.
It is our responsibility as human beings who care about freedom and civilization and the well-being of our fellow man to do what we can to make our own government, and in fact all governments, enforce and promote Liberty for all men everywhere. Conversely, evil men, using the power of government, will do their best to enslave us and the entire world.
Governments are great powerful organizations which rule us and which should be rightly feared. Good men should do everything possible to conquer and to gain control of governments, and to remove all evil men from governments.
The basic purpose of the Citizen Contract is to put “Fundamental Rights” beyond the reach of being reduced or cancelled by majority vote. “Fundamental Rights” are the same as Liberty, spelled out in considerable detail. This detail is put into the Citizen Contract. And the Citizen Contract is given such high authority, that it is essentially impossible to change.
The details given in the Citizen Contract cannot be changed. So we better get them right.
THE START OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE
There is no doubt that the Right to Life is vital to a civilization and to a government dedicated to Liberty.
In his definitions of “Fundamental Rights” as spelled out in his proposed Citizen Contract, Skousen defines the Right to Life as beginning at conception. Thus abortion is outlawed and is prosecuted and punished as murder.
I disagree with this. I also see this as a major strategic blunder in the struggle for Liberty.
Therefore it is necessary to discuss the subject of abortion.
SKOUSEN WANTS TO UNITE LIBERTY LOVERS
Skousen’s introductory essay is titled “IN DEFENSE OF A PRINCIPLED APPROACH TO LAW” (http://www.joelskousen.com/Philosophy/principledapproachtolaw.html). In it, he says:
“My interest is in building a unified consensus for just law and government among conservatives, libertarians and honest, non-coercive liberals who are currently factionalized into hundreds of small and medium-sized organizations – none of which have any real power to stop the forces arrayed against us. Christian conservatives are at odds with regular conservatives over not putting God to the forefront of every proposal. Social conservatives are at odds with libertarians over how much personal liberty to allow when it leads to personal corruption that has public or indirect private effects on society.”
“Conservatives of liberty can’t possibly win the current battle nor even govern properly unless key issues that divide us are worked out while we can still assemble and debate in relative peace.”
“We need to step back and regroup as a movement and chart a new course for liberty based upon consistent principles that are capable of unifying all good people.” “These proposed principles provide the hope that we might once and for all resolve the core issues of law and government and provide a stable and comprehensive basis for unity – at least among those who view themselves as conservatives of liberty.”
SKOUSEN SAYS WE NEED CLEAR THINKING
Skousen says, “All too often few conservatives or honest liberals demonstrate the patience, tolerance, or ability to do the tough thinking it takes to argue differences of opinion.”. “One of the best ways to avoid contention is for both sides to stick to sound thinking, and to be humble enough to accept correction when thinking patterns are illogical or incomplete.”.
ABORTION IS NOT A “CORE ISSUE”
Skousen wants to “unify all good people”. He wants to “resolve the core issues” and to provide a “basis for unity” among “conservatives of liberty”. This is a very fine idea.
He specifically names “Christian conservatives” and “Social conservatives” as groups who are pushing agendas which add additional issues to the “core issues” which are essential to Liberty.
Skousen wants to identify “consistent principles that are capable of unifying all good people”.
This involves identifying and separating out those issues which are not “core issues”.
Then, having identified the “core issues” which are in fact essential to Liberty, we can wrap those up in a package, wave the flag, and rally all Lovers of Liberty to this package of essentials, “unify all good people”, and become a great and powerful political force for Liberty.
Thus, for example, Skousen opposes including Christianity as part of the package of essentials of Liberty. He does not want to alienate non-Christians. He believes that non-Christians who love Liberty can be included as part of “all good people”, and as part of “conservatives of liberty”.
Similarly, Skousen opposes broadly outlawing pornography as would be favored by “Social conservatives”. Having pornography is something that people can do without infringing on the Fundamental Rights of others. Thus pornography is not a “core issue” which is essential to Liberty. Again, he wants to allow Libertarians who favor pornography to be included in “all good people” and in “conservatives of liberty”.
Skousen proposes the use of a “covenant community” system. That is, a limited geographical area could have its own “Citizen Contract” which sets more strict standards, in addition to the basic rules involved in enforcing Fundamental Rights. By unanimous consent, those who live in such an area can enforce Christianity, or outlaw pornography, or anything else which they choose to agree upon by unanimous consent. This is, in essence, simply a contractual agreement. Thus it does not violate anyone’s Fundamental Rights. This is quite a brilliant idea.
The issue of abortion is not a “core issue”. It is not essential to Liberty.
Opposing abortion should be classified with advocating Christianity and with opposing pornography. It is not a “core issue”. It is not essential to Liberty. Those who want to add this to their rules of living can form or join a “covenant community” which unanimously agrees to live by these rules.
Skousen argues that the issues of Christianity and pornography must be separated from the issue of Liberty itself. Thus we can “unify all good people” and “conservatives of liberty”.
The identical argument applies to the issue of abortion.
OUTLAWING ABORTION DOES NOTHING FOR THE CAUSE OF LIBERTY
Where is the benefit to the cause of Liberty that comes from outlawing abortion?
The tyrant says, “Do what I say, or I will kill you!”. We say, “The tyrant should not be allowed to do that. We have the Right to Life!”.
How does this apply to the unborn child? It does not.
OUTLAWING ABORTION WILL ALIENATE MANY LOVERS OF LIBERTY
Joel Skousen wants to unite Christians and non-Christians in a common cause to fight for Liberty. But if the banner under which he wants to unite them makes abortion forever and unchangeably murder, that will be very harmful to the cause. It will alienate non-Christians. It will alienate all those who do not agree that women with an unwanted pregnancy should be forced to have the child.
That is a very large number of people who will be alienated from this group of Liberty Lovers.
And for what gain? To appease the wrath of God? What benefit does this have in the world of real men?
In the world of real men, the civilization of the entire world is collapsing into chaos, war, and slavery. The issue of abortion is just plain irrelevant. Unless God is counting abortions and planning to smite the good guys for allowing too many abortions, then it has nothing to do with the great struggle to preserve Liberty and civilization. A lot of us Liberty Lovers do not believe that God is counting abortions in a ledger of high crimes.
By fighting against abortion when they could be fighting for Liberty, Christians are wasting their energy and making themselves irrelevant to history.
* * * * * * *
Comments