The Left's addition to the Bill of Rights

This is an excerpt from a conversation with a friend concerning food, shelter, and clothing being rights.

"We hold 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 the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." - Declaration of Independence.

This country was founded on the idea that individuals have a right to be free from government intrusion in their life (aka liberty). Much blood was shed to rid Americans from the heel of the King of England. Our Government's original purpose was to secure and protect those rights and leave individuals free to pursue happiness and provide for themselves. This was not a promise of happiness. It was never the intention of the founders that government was to provide for the people, they have no enumerated power in the Constitution to do so.

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” — James Madison, 4 Annals of Congress 179, 1794

"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government." - Thomas Jefferson

It was government's responsibility to protect and ensure an environment where individuals could provide for themselves, acquire property and wealth free of government interference. Food, Shelter, and Clothing are not rights; they are things to be earned and worked for. If they are treated as rights, you must violate the actual rights of one who's earned, and give those earnings to another. Apart from the government forceably taking one's earnings and giving it to another through law (aka socialism which is heralded as "social justice"), this is called theft and is punishable as a crime. The idea of People having rights to "things" previously earned was popularized by FDR and his new Bill of Rights during the disaster that was the New Deal. These new rights consisted of rights to a house, a livable wage, health care, clothing, food, a job etc. The Constitution states the enumerated powers government has, what powers not enumerated in the Constitution are left to the states and to the People. The Bill of Rights specifically says what government cannot do to the People, not what it must do for the People.

By the very act of providing for someone what they would otherwise have to work for to provide for themselves, you destroy the human spirit, initiative, and desire to work and provide and consequently enslave them. This prevents them from realizing their full potential and makes them dependent on the government's conditional "generosity", which is a "bait and switch" by the government to get more power and votes. These recipients of the government's conditional generosity are then the subjects to government which is ultimately a theft of their freedoms. Our founders knew this is the end result of the welfare state: a loss of freedom and liberty, rampant poverty, and a tyrannical government. Our founders were very aware of the dangers of the welfare state and that it wasn't the answer to poverty. Ben Franklin says it well:

“I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it.” — Benjamin Franklin

Repeal that [welfare] law, and you will soon see a change in their manners. ... Six days shalt thou labor, though one of the old commandments long treated as out of date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing all your estates among them. - Benjamin Franklin

What about the people who cannot work or provide for themselves due to a physical or psychological condition? I would most prefer that these individuals be provided for by private charity and by their families. Ideally in a society with a Christian consensus or Christian-like principles, private charity would be adequate, as that is a Biblical exhortation to Christians. The Bible does not advocate charity through government seizing my money through taxes and redistributing it (the small fraction they don't absorb) according to their discretion. The Bible says be charitable yourself to others, there is no middle man. It is not government's job to force me to be charitable. That is socialism and it is oppression. If they don't have family or adequate private charity, I would very reluctantly allow for government welfare to such individuals upon proving that there is a legitimate and existing condition that prevents them from earning an income. The goal of any welfare assistance should be to get people off of it if at all possible as soon as possible. Government should encourage and provide incentives for private charity, not tax it like Obama plans to do now.

"Once the government becomes the supplier of people's needs, there is no limit to the needs that will be claimed as a basic right." - Lawrence Auster

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams