Self Evident: evident in itself without proof or demonstration; axiomatic
All men: regardless of origin, faith, political alignment, age, race, sex, sexual preference, and even regardless of past crimes.
God (I'm sorry if you don't believe in Him, but I do) gave us these rights, not man, nor a government created by man.
Unalienable: not to be separated, given away, or taken away; inalienable
Life and Happiness are somewhat obvious, so I won't take the time to spell them out. But Liberty on the other hand, now that is a subject that few people truly understand. If you care to read about some of the ideas behind Liberty, read this, and this.
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly 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. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
Despotism:
1. | the rule of a despot; the exercise of absolute authority. |
2. | absolute power or control; tyranny. |
3. | an absolute or autocratic government. |
4. | a country ruled by a despot. |
When a government, under the guise of protecting it's citizens, actively removes and abolishes the rights of others, it creates a scenario similar to that of when the pilgrims left England. That little shift in peoples perception of government led to the creation of the United States of America. The quotes from above are taken directly from the text of the Declaration of Independence.
In today's society, we are still recovering from the Civil Rights movements, Woman's Rights movement, and more recently, Gay and Lesbian Rights movements. What people forget, or sometimes were not aware of, is that when the government loses control over a previously subdued and segregated entity, they go and find another one to pick on.
Having a common enemy gives the government purpose. It helps the general public feel justified in giving the government it's money. Without a common enemy, the people would cease to bend to the wishes of the government.
The latest common enemy is criminals. And much more specifically, sex offenders. (I would like to clarify that I am not supporting the behavior of any sex offender, or the abolition of the sex offender laws by any means) Sex offenders have become the latest and greatest common enemy the government has seen.
Sex Offender legislation is reaching a fervor the likes of which I doubt this country has ever seen. Every single legislative season is crammed with S.O. bills. Bills that restrict how far an offender can live from another offender, or bills that put large bold type on a S.O.'s drivers license, or legislative bills that uniformly categorize and offender regardless of when it happened or the details, and lets not forget about legislative bills that speak of offenders getting their rights back and allowing them to become contributing members of society, except for S.O.'s.
Everyone loves to hate sex offenders. But, they are still human. In spite of what the government tries to preach about them being sub-human and worthless. Sex offenders have Civil Rights too. They were created equal, and they also have the same unalienable rights as those that never committed a crime.
Unfortunately, sex offenders are considered to be so sub-human, that even after they have served their time in jail, completed their treatment, and payed their debt to society, they continuously get shoved farther and farther down the ladder of society.
So far as to almost rival that of the slaves back in the 1800's. How could I possible say that you ask? Let me explain.
"Slavery", as defined by the Slavery Convention of 1926, is (1)the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, and "slave" means a person in such condition or status, (2) the slave trade includes all acts involved in the capture, acquisition or disposal of a person with intent to reduce him to slavery; all acts involved in the acquisition of a slave with a view to selling or exchanging him; all acts of disposal by sale or exchange of a slave acquired with a view to being sold or exchanged, and, in general, every act of trade or transport in slaves.
The government uses the "right of ownership" (via the DOC) to tell an offender where he can live, with whom he can live, how close he can live to another offender, how close that offender can live to a daycare, nursing home, park, school, bus stop, etc.
And good ol' Uncle Sam uses that "ownership" to come up with new ways to further suppress sex offenders every year.
Sex Offenders are being segregated out of society, for life! And all under the guise of "Regulatory". But, Liberty being an unalienable right, creates a Constitutionality issue with Uncle Sam's ideas of late.
I believe it was the thirteenth amendment that abolished slavery. And, I believe that there is a law about segregation as well.
In the thirteenth amendment, it talks about "except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted". When a criminal is "convicted", there is a sentence attached. If you continuously add to that sentence, you are going outside of the courts to attach punishment for a crime that is already ruled on. That creates another issue that we'll have to discuss at another time.
Here is a quote from a man I've quoted many times before:
- Thomas Paine."
Criminals lose their right to vote, and according to law, they get it back when their time is served. Except for Sex Offenders.
When will this country learn that segregation will only lead to hardship? Not only for the person being segregated, but also by the very government itself when it has to fight it out in court at a later time.
Segregation will ultimately lead to the destruction of this country as we know it. The very methods that help to create these laws will be used to separate and compartmentalize the very citizens that it's supposed to protect.
Few people realise that 93% of all sex offenders were known (either relatives, or close friend of the family) to the victim.
What if that was your son, your daughter, your wife, or your husband? Would you be able to watch them get treated like that? Would you feel that the system was just then?
Or would you come back and reread this post looking for ideas to fight it?