You are currently browsing the American Clarity weblog archives for the day 5. November 2010.
- cultural/racial (32)
- economy (18)
- foreign policy (6)
- immigration (5)
- Islam (3)
- multiculturalism (14)
- natural law and rights (35)
- Personal (1)
- philosophy (85)
- politics (75)
- sex (4)
- Theology (44)
- Uncategorized (8)
- worldview (13)
- 26. April 2012: The evil of disorder
- 16. April 2012: Biblical justice for Trayvon and Zimmerman
- 13. April 2012: Lessons from Rome about liberal unity
- 10. April 2012: Reflections on Kony 2012: why liberal charities make me angry
- 10. April 2012: Race mobs, Trayvon, and my conversion to conservatism
- 25. March 2012: Sharing the burdens of others: sympathy and empathy
- 13. March 2012: The Biblical case against supporting Israel
- 29. February 2012: The honorable clerk
- 28. February 2012: Christian Sharia? Part 1: Biblical Law in Historical America
- 22. February 2012: Christian Sharia? Part 2: Applying Biblical Law to a Free Society
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- January 2009
Archive for 5. November 2010
When unity is wrong
5. November 2010 by admin.
Editor’s note: this article is dedicated to my first non-familial fan, Esky.
Why do we belong together?
This should not be an offensive question, yet it cannot seriously be asked in our modern political climate–particularly by conservatives–without expecting angry retribution. But when John Jay wrote Federalist Paper #2, he did so out of the need to convince the American people that they must cede some of their natural rights for the sake of unity; that, although the states had distinct governments and oftentimes different interests, they would need to sacrifice some of these interests for a greater good. Jay reasoned that this unity always comes at a price, but he was also able to guarantee that the overwhelming majority of identity and of morality would be preserved despite the institution of an American union. Indeed, this small price for unity was one of his key arguments in favor of the US Constitution. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in natural law and rights, philosophy, politics, cultural/racial | Print | 1 Comment »