The government is removing the link between man and the divine. Another aspect that angered Thoreau was the fact that “Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them” (393). This again goes along with the belief that man has the ability to know what is just, given by God, and does not need a government to decide for them how to live, especially when those ways are not true. In summation, Thoreau wants the government to lose the power it holds over the people so they can practice the morality and justice they know to be true due to man's connection with the
1. What is essential to the “preservation of liberty?” How should this “be so constituted?” The powers of government must be separated in order to preserve liberty To do this, the members of one branch should have little to no power over the selection of members of another branch This separation of powers ensures that no one branch gains control of the other two branches The people should have control and elect who fills most offices 2. Explain the following: “A dependence upon the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.” Man has the tendency to put his ambitions first and be greedy The government is made up of man; therefore there must be Constitutional safeguards restricting the actions of powerful government
Thoreau states, “ It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much for the right. The only obligation which I have to assume to do at any time what I think is right”(306). This indicating that Thoreau only followed laws that he believed were right and fair. He didn’t believe he needed to pay attention to unjust laws. Also he doesn’t believe you need to pay respect to unjust laws.
One his theories, stated in his book called Leviathan said that people are not able rule themselves because of how selfish mankind is and they need to be ruled by an iron fist. His political theory was that was also stated in Leviathan was that we should respect government authority under all circumstances to avoid violence. Hobbes was scared of the outcome of the social contract which meant people could get rid of the government if they were unhappy with what they were getting. In order to make well with the social contract he states in Leviathan that people should be completely obedient to the government. His reasoning was that if there was no government, there would be chaos.
Politics, by its very nature, cannot infer natural and moral rights upon men. These rights exist inherently in men both inside and outside of politics. Humans alone possess logos, rationality which allows them to craft moral judgements about the world. Logos facilitates the formation and practice of politics, but it exists independently outside of politics. Logos gives birth to rationality, upon which natural and sacred rights hinge, for “reason, which is that law [of natural rights] teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions”.
What exactly these boundaries are, and how to enforce them, is a source of controversy. Proponents of Just War Theory, such as John Rawls, believe that “in the conduct of war, a democratic society must carefully distinguish three groups: the states’ leaders and officials, its soldiers, and its civilian population” (Rawls 114), and there exist international laws and statues that provide heavy protection to civilians during wartime. As a result of this human intuition to fight fair, civilians have certain moral rights during wartime, despite any uncertainty around the logistics of these moral rights. The intentional killing of innocents during wartime violates these rights and oversteps the moral boundaries of
God can't guarantee that some creatures won't sometimes choose to act badly. God can't guarantee that that world won't contain evil. All evil in the world is the result of free actions by created creatures and there is no possible world God could have created that contains a better balance of both moral good and evil. The Free Will Defense concludes that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and wholly good, and God creates free men who sometimes preform morally evil actions is not contradictory or necessarily false. "It is possible that God, even being omnipotent, could not create a world with free creatures who never choose evil.
Roosevelt faced many opponents in his rule for not doing enough or doing too much to help. He said “I am waging a war against Destruction, Delay, Deceit and Despair”. Roosevelt in the extremity of sorting out “destruction” and “despair” had to take drastic measures. As a result, the New Deal did not benefit everyone causing a great deal of controversy. Some of his policies were seen as an attack on individual freedom and the aging American constitution.
To be alive in the era of civilized men means individuality is sacrificed for the good of the whole; although if individuality is forsaken to be part of this whole, the individual must avoid letting the group control his thoughts lest this affect his rationality. Arthur Miller found the Salem Witch Trials an exemplary example which demonstrated the dangerous repercussions of mass sensationalism in The Crucible. In Puritan society all decisions are to be based on god’s will, this high level of spirituality is difficult to maintain and more so difficult to properly judge. If we are to properly judge as announced to be our intention then must define sensationalism, why it is a negative force, and the branching problems it invokes. Sensationalism and the societal hive mind is a continuous notion in any group.
But then, I realized that this metaphor is not THAT appropriate. The King Herod had total freedom and justification to be against the request made by the princess, and in return, he would be paid by the blessing of God. The only thing he had to do is to save the poor man prisoned in the cell, and the sole thing he needed to abandon his authority of being a rule of a country. Besides, I don’t think Herod is the kind of people who devote themselves to cherish their own reputation. He made a vow which he couldn’t