A basic legal principle...

[stevie_d_64]

During the course and development of the Healthcare reform being proposed and promoted by the liberal statists that are in the majority now in our Federal Government. It is apparent that through all of this process that no one has applied the simple (yet complicated for some) template of the law and the Constitution to assess whether or not this is actually legal to do, or at the very least Constitutional.

As of this writing, a few media and legal minds have been recently bringing this point up, and yet it has not hit the mainstream in the thought processes of the most important demographic that will be most affected by this drastic change in this country’s history.

The fact is that the reform measure(s) proposed (many versions of the bill are floating around making it difficult for anyone to nail down any one point of difference or agreement on the overall agenda) are not Constitutional or legal because it has not been established that anyone who refuses to comply with this Federal mandate would be breaking the law in the first place. Simply put, a legislative process must first (and are supposed to) establish an illegality in the law before any punishments can be enumerated.

The Congress has, in sub-committee(s), introduced the penalties for not obtaining some form of health insurance in the form of various levels of monetary fines, and more recently explained that the penalty for not obtaining AND maintaining health coverage (insurance) can be a jail-able offense.

So again, it has become apparent that the Federal Government has, in its short-sightedness, determined that those American citizens who object to doing this based upon a well established and personal right to refuse traditional, secular medical treatment, from licensed physicians across the country for, now get this, this is very important, for religious reasons, will now have their Constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness violated by the very government that is charged with protecting those rights.

However unwise that lifestyle and belief system may, or may not be, our elected officials need to be held in contempt for violating these basic principles.

So those American citizens who do not seek these services for religious beliefs will now become criminals based solely upon their faith in God.

There are many examples of these situations in the Bible that illustrate this condition. That God has a reason and plan for putting these challenges before us. It may and can be interpreted as a form of tough love, yet I believe it is something that challenges us to do what is right, by honoring the gift he has given us to live as perfect as we can, yet knowing we’ll never really be able to, but the effort to do so is honorable.

On these points alone, would be cause to cease all efforts to force free men and women to comply with these basic violations of free citizens in a country that was founded upon moral principles as was our nation.

There are some people we need to contact, and bring these simple, yet clear objections to a government that has overstepped its Constitutional authority and operating boundaries, and it needs to be delivered on a daily basis, until it has had the effect to rid ourselves of this type of intrusive and overbearing oversight that has been getting worse and worse over time.

“I do not fear my government, but I am deeply concerned over the tyranny of good intentions.” ~ stevie-d (2001)

[stevie_d_64]

Obviously I am not a lawyer, yet when something hits you at 3am in the morning it is good to get this stuff down on paper as quickly as possible...The mind tends to wander off topic after a while...

What is key, is that a few years ago a fantastic legal mind told me one time that to assess penalties for illegal activity, you must first establish that that activity is illegal, THEN you can assess potiential fines or jail terms for the severity of the offense...

Apparently our government has failed to apply this template in the correct order...That is one of the points I wanted to make with this editorial...

Lets see, whether I am right or wrong (technically) with this observation, lets see if this can resonate with the right people or not...I'm actually curious to see if it does...

No one should be concerned about offending me if they dissagree, or want to poke holes in my obsesrvation, I welcome it more than accolades...

[Y2bad4u]

[KC5AV]

It seems to me that the legislation will probably have to be enacted, and then challenged in court before a determination will be made whether it is actually legal.