by: Clifford Hallmark
May 1, 2004
Moscow, Russia --- Today the Russian Parliament passed a directive to authorize local district governments to immediately execute any Surgeon who amputates one of their own hands. The directive was passed to stem the rash of Doctors who have followed the lead of Dr. Krepkoi as a form of protest to the deteriorating conditions and long working hours. To date 24 Doctors have performed this procedure on themselves.
This strange phenomenon started about 8 months ago in the small Siberian town of Uaachnyy when Dr. Kres Krepkoi saw no relief to the poor working conditions at the Lenin Collective Hospital. Dr. Krepkoi repeatedly appealed to the Government Officials in Lensk for relief. The lack of medical supplies, poor sanitary conditions, and the pressure of having greater demand for his services helped lead to the decision.
Dr. Krepkoi had performed hundreds of procedures a week. The surgeries ranged form repairing broken bones to attempts at heart bypass. The Lenin Collective Hospital is the only facility within a 250 mile radius. Due to the remote location of Uaachuyy, travel conditions are treacherous. Depending on the weather, it might take weeks for the supply truck to reach the hospital. The deteriorating conditions at Uaachnyy and all across Russia have been the major concern of many Doctors.
Dr. Krepkoi was forced to live at the hospital due to the lack of doctors in the area and also because of the constant demand for his services. “Many time I can not leave hospital. The crowds outside hospital won’t let me. They say they need doctor. I must see them.” People have been demonstrating for better service and some rock throwing has occurred outside the hospital many times. Not just in Uaachuyy, but throughout Russia.
Dr Krepkoi’s family was forced the move to Kaluga, where his wife serves as an educator. Dr Krepkoi applied for a transfer but was denied. In an attempt to persuade the area Minister, Dr. Krepkoi removed his left hand just below the wrist. Dr. Krepkoi said he was no use to the hospital, but would make a fine teacher of medicine back at Kaluga.
A Russian Official said that Dr Krepkoi is currently under house arrest. “He will be dealt with as all citizens that avoid their duty to the service of their country and to their fellow citizens. This is a case where he was only thinking of himself and we cannot let others think that they will be rewarded for such acts”.
© 2004 Clifford Hallmark
Monday, June 15, 2009
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Halloween Story
by Clifford Hallmark
That night he Tricked-N-Treated with such drive and intensity. He wouldn’t even eat any candy when we returned home.
The next day at school, the “teacher” was glad to see that almost everybody brought in their “assignments”. She did do “averages, bar graphs, and ratios”. She also taught them about “FAIRNESS”.
The “teacher” “ASKED” all of her students to dump all their candy into a big pile on the table. With some hesitation and a lot of coaxing, she finally had all the candy on the table. She began dividing up the candy, one piece at a time to all of her students. All the students now had “equal” amounts of candy. The odd candy left over the “teacher” kept to hand out later to those who she saw fit.
My son could not believe that his was happening! He tried to protest but the teacher and most of the other students made him feel selfish and greedy. She told him this was the only “FAIR” way to do things. “ It’s not right that some students have more than others. This is the only fair and equal way,” she said.
When I picked my son up from school he was so upset. He told me what happened and I could not believe it. My son said, “ I wish I never went Trick or Treating”
I parked the car and went to his classroom. The “teacher” wasn’t there but another teacher said she would go get her. When she finally arrived I told her who I was and why I came to see her.
“I figured I would hear from one of his parent’s. He was the only one that had a big problem with this assignment.” She said.
“And you think it’s fair that you took his candy from him” I said with disbelief.
“I didn’t take it! They all voluntarily put their candy into the pile. Everyone thought it was fair except your son.” She snapped.
I went to the principal's office but she had already left for the day. I called the principle the next day and she told me “I have no real control over how each teacher conducts their class. I see no real problem with the lesson your son’s “teacher” is trying to convey.”
Let this be a warning to you. If you let this happen now, who is going to stop it later!!
© 2000 Clifford Hallmark
On Halloween Day (Oct. 31,2000) my eleven year-old Son came home from school with an “assignment”. This “assignment” was to bring in all of your Halloween candy that you collected and we will be “doing averages, bar graphs, and ratios”. My Son couldn’t wait. He wanted to bring in the most candy.
That night he Tricked-N-Treated with such drive and intensity. He wouldn’t even eat any candy when we returned home.
The next day at school, the “teacher” was glad to see that almost everybody brought in their “assignments”. She did do “averages, bar graphs, and ratios”. She also taught them about “FAIRNESS”.
The “teacher” “ASKED” all of her students to dump all their candy into a big pile on the table. With some hesitation and a lot of coaxing, she finally had all the candy on the table. She began dividing up the candy, one piece at a time to all of her students. All the students now had “equal” amounts of candy. The odd candy left over the “teacher” kept to hand out later to those who she saw fit.
My son could not believe that his was happening! He tried to protest but the teacher and most of the other students made him feel selfish and greedy. She told him this was the only “FAIR” way to do things. “ It’s not right that some students have more than others. This is the only fair and equal way,” she said.
When I picked my son up from school he was so upset. He told me what happened and I could not believe it. My son said, “ I wish I never went Trick or Treating”
I parked the car and went to his classroom. The “teacher” wasn’t there but another teacher said she would go get her. When she finally arrived I told her who I was and why I came to see her.
“I figured I would hear from one of his parent’s. He was the only one that had a big problem with this assignment.” She said.
“And you think it’s fair that you took his candy from him” I said with disbelief.
“I didn’t take it! They all voluntarily put their candy into the pile. Everyone thought it was fair except your son.” She snapped.
I went to the principal's office but she had already left for the day. I called the principle the next day and she told me “I have no real control over how each teacher conducts their class. I see no real problem with the lesson your son’s “teacher” is trying to convey.”
Let this be a warning to you. If you let this happen now, who is going to stop it later!!
© 2000 Clifford Hallmark
Thursday, February 1, 2007
The Unalienable Rights of Man
by Clifford Hallmark
Throughout history Man has had no rights. From Egypt to Greece to Rome to England, Man has been subject to the wants and whims of Kings, Monarchs and Emperors. Every system of government has been against Man. It seems that Man lives for the sole purpose of serving society or government. Man has been looked upon as a tool for advancing Kingdoms and Empires. The concept that every Man from everywhere should be looked upon as an equal was totally obscure and obscene.
For the first time in the history of the World, Man has been set free from the bondage that he was subject to. America was founded on the principle of individual rights. Rights that every Man possesses. These "Unalienable Rights" are the rights that our Founding Fathers sought to protect. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" would not be possible if these rights were not secured and guaranteed by our Constitution.
America was the first government based on a written Constitution in which Man has set the limits of government, and forbids the violation of individual rights. The laws of this Country should be based on these rights and no Man or government should ever violate "The Unalienable Rights of Man"
I've set forth the principles that America was based on in a short summary. I tried to be as concise as possible.
All men are born equal: man has the right to his own life (life = existence) i.e. freedom from forced dictation, coercion, or interference from others. Every man has the freedom to act on his own judgment, and to impose no obligations on other men. No man should have his life violated unless he violates the life of another man. Man has the right to defend his life. Mans right to his own life is not derived from society or government: society or government is obligated to protect each individual man’s life. Each man has to respect the life of other men if one wants his life protected. No group of men can acquire the right to life over the individual man nor can a group of men lose the right to life. There is only the right to life of the “individual man” this right is possessed by every individual man and by all men as individuals. There is no compromise on this right. There is no limit to this right. This is an absolute.
From this “Right to Life” man has to support and sustain his life. To do this man must take action or he will die. To secure this action the “Right to Property” is derived. Without the right to property no other rights are possible. This to is an individual right. This right to property is not derived from society or government: society or government is obligated to protect each individual’s right to property. Man has the right to his own effort i.e. the right to his own mind and the right to his own labor. The right to property guarantees that man has the right to gain, to keep, to use, and to dispose of his effort. It is not a guarantee that man will gain property but if a man earns property he will own it. The only way man can lose his property without his consent is by force or fraud. No man can impose an unchosen obligation on any other man. Any undertaking that involves more than one man must be voluntary. Voluntary consent must come from every individual man. Every man must make his own decision on what actions to take and can not force or impose his decisions on any other man.
From the “Right to Property” the “Right to Free Trade” is derived. Without the free trade of man’s property, man would be isolated. Free trade is the social application of the right to property. This to is an individual right. This right to free trade is not derived from society or government: society or government is obligated to protect each individual’s right to free trade. Man is free to voluntary trade his effort for the effort of other men. Every part of free trade is derived from the right of the individual. Individual choices, individual agreements, and individual relationships are all voluntary. Man has the right to support his life by his own effort. Therefore the right to free trade of man’s property is the right to life.
With the “Right to Free Trade” man needed a system to protect his “Unalienable Rights” from other men. Man needed a system to enforce the rules of social conduct. Man needed a system to bar physical force from social relationships. Man needed a system to protect his rights from the use of force, to protect his property, and to settle disputes with other men.
“To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men…”
Declaration of Independence, July 4 1776
For this reason man instituted this government for the sole task of protecting the rights of the individual. Man has delegated to this government the sole use of force in order to protect man’s rights. No man can initiate force on another man. The government holds the monopoly on physical force. The government can only initiate force against those men who violate other men’s rights. The government can not initiate force against man to violate his rights, only to protect them. The government can only take action against individuals who violate other men’s rights by the threat of physical injury, threat to take property, imprisonment, or death. The government can not discriminate against whose rights it will protect; the government must protect the rights of all individuals.
When a government fails to protect any of these “Unalienable Rights” or a government deprives individuals of these rights, this is considered a breach on the governments part. When a government neglects or usurps its bound obligation, this invokes the last “Unalienable Right”. The “Right of Revolution”. The word revolution is derived from revolve. Revolve is to orbit or circle. Since man institutes governments, man has the right to throw out a government that violates or fails to protect his individual rights. This is a revolution. No man has property in future generations, so man can not obligate future generations to a system of government forever. This is the reason why our Constitution is a “living document” and can be amended by future generations.
These are the principles that our government is based on. This is the philosophy that changed the World (and still is changing it today). If these "Rights" seem foreign to you, you shouldn’t be surprised…you should be shocked. Most Americans feel that they have rights but that they are granted to them by the government. Today some Americans appeal to the government to help violate someone else’s rights or to secure more rights for themselves. Individualism recognizes the "Rights of Man" as his own and that of every individual Man.
From this “Right to Life” man has to support and sustain his life. To do this man must take action or he will die. To secure this action the “Right to Property” is derived. Without the right to property no other rights are possible. This to is an individual right. This right to property is not derived from society or government: society or government is obligated to protect each individual’s right to property. Man has the right to his own effort i.e. the right to his own mind and the right to his own labor. The right to property guarantees that man has the right to gain, to keep, to use, and to dispose of his effort. It is not a guarantee that man will gain property but if a man earns property he will own it. The only way man can lose his property without his consent is by force or fraud. No man can impose an unchosen obligation on any other man. Any undertaking that involves more than one man must be voluntary. Voluntary consent must come from every individual man. Every man must make his own decision on what actions to take and can not force or impose his decisions on any other man.
From the “Right to Property” the “Right to Free Trade” is derived. Without the free trade of man’s property, man would be isolated. Free trade is the social application of the right to property. This to is an individual right. This right to free trade is not derived from society or government: society or government is obligated to protect each individual’s right to free trade. Man is free to voluntary trade his effort for the effort of other men. Every part of free trade is derived from the right of the individual. Individual choices, individual agreements, and individual relationships are all voluntary. Man has the right to support his life by his own effort. Therefore the right to free trade of man’s property is the right to life.
With the “Right to Free Trade” man needed a system to protect his “Unalienable Rights” from other men. Man needed a system to enforce the rules of social conduct. Man needed a system to bar physical force from social relationships. Man needed a system to protect his rights from the use of force, to protect his property, and to settle disputes with other men.
“To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men…”
Declaration of Independence, July 4 1776
For this reason man instituted this government for the sole task of protecting the rights of the individual. Man has delegated to this government the sole use of force in order to protect man’s rights. No man can initiate force on another man. The government holds the monopoly on physical force. The government can only initiate force against those men who violate other men’s rights. The government can not initiate force against man to violate his rights, only to protect them. The government can only take action against individuals who violate other men’s rights by the threat of physical injury, threat to take property, imprisonment, or death. The government can not discriminate against whose rights it will protect; the government must protect the rights of all individuals.
When a government fails to protect any of these “Unalienable Rights” or a government deprives individuals of these rights, this is considered a breach on the governments part. When a government neglects or usurps its bound obligation, this invokes the last “Unalienable Right”. The “Right of Revolution”. The word revolution is derived from revolve. Revolve is to orbit or circle. Since man institutes governments, man has the right to throw out a government that violates or fails to protect his individual rights. This is a revolution. No man has property in future generations, so man can not obligate future generations to a system of government forever. This is the reason why our Constitution is a “living document” and can be amended by future generations.
These are the principles that our government is based on. This is the philosophy that changed the World (and still is changing it today). If these "Rights" seem foreign to you, you shouldn’t be surprised…you should be shocked. Most Americans feel that they have rights but that they are granted to them by the government. Today some Americans appeal to the government to help violate someone else’s rights or to secure more rights for themselves. Individualism recognizes the "Rights of Man" as his own and that of every individual Man.
I used the term “Unalienable” as it is misspelled to show the reference I used. The Declaration of Independence.
These are some people that have inspired the “rights” we now take for granted: Aristotle, Zeno, Epictectus, Cicero, Francis Bacon, Hugo Grotius, Richard Hooker, Rene Descartes, Benedict de Spinoza, Thomas Hobbes, Algernon Sidney, John Locke, Charles Montequieu, Adam Smith.
© 1998 Clifford Hallmark
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)