Re: [TheLandIsOurs] Fw: UK baby born free gets passport
- Quoting Gibran is all well and good (in his context he makes sense) but he talks of a mindset, an attitude parents have towards their children. The birth certificate is a bit of paper but with very real implications - see Ch4News tonight anyone?: http://www.channel4.com/news/ch4-special-report-do-experts-harm-family-court-cases'I am reminded of the story of a fellow in Michigan who has five children, the first four of whom have birth certificates. The youngest was born at home and hence has no birth certificate (same as mine). One day the dad was in a store with his kids and was yelling at one of them. A ‘public-minded’ woman overheard this and, like all good informants, telephoned Child Protective Services to report child abuse. The next day the cops came by and confiscated all five of his children. The following day the cops came by and returned the youngest, saying, “This one’s not ours'' Mary Elizabeth Croft. 'How I Clobbered Every Bureaucratic, Cash-confiscatory Agency Known to Man'. http://www.freedomfiles.org/mary-book.pdfAs to the question of the NHS or any other 'benefit' one might receive from the state in exchange for being bonded, what we are talking about here is freedom - the freedom to participate in something and the freedom to choose NOT TO! The state makes it exceedingly difficult to do the latter - I asked why that might be but no-one seems very interested in the answer which is interesting in itself! Participate if you want to - who's stopping you? Certainly not the govt; feel smug about it even and laugh at the idiocy of those who don't, that's your right! But when you make a contract there has to be full disclosure and in the case of registering your birth there is none. Let people know what it is and what it means and let them do it with full knowledge!The question is, do we have the freedom to choose how to live our lives or do we not? If you think these parents are silly then you have the freedom to say so (that particular freedom is a great thing that should be celebrated and protected) but does your opinion really matter to them? What matters to them, if they're at all enlightened about these things, is that you have the freedom to express it: 'I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' Voltaire.What seems to be missing here is a healthy questioning of state power over citizens - when lies and coercion are used to frighten people into registering their childrens' births then that is a big red flag that signals all is not well. Isn't that obvious! Not only are you bonded by it but it is sold for profit! No wonder the state wants you to do it! And will try to scare you back into line if there's even a hint of you waking up.Is the way society is organized right now the only option then? How depressingly limited! Can we not imagine a better way where there is full sovereignty, real freedom and genuine democracy as opposed to the illusion of it we have now? Is it 'join up or shut up' and snipe at anyone trying to reach for something more conducive to human dignity, or can we build something better? '..all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed'. Declaration of Independence.As Thoreau said in his must-read, seminal essay of 1849, 'Civil Disobedience':The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to — for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I...is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it. The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual...Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. I please myself with imagining a State at least which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow-men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which also I have imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.I think old Thoreau would be pretty happy with Occupy......
From: Simon Fairlie <chapter7@...>
Sent: Sunday, 29 April 2012, 23:57
Subject: Re: [TheLandIsOurs] Fw: UK baby born free gets passport
Yes, and another reason is that the state can thereby tax the rich to provide the national health service that the parents in question apparently can't manage without.On 29 Apr 2012, at 22:33, george dicegeorge wrote: