Link To buy: Boxing is cheaper than therapy poster.
Or buy at: Store.
Bastiat attributed to the government the same reasons as the Founders of America, writing: “Life, liberty and property exist in the world not because people make laws. On the contrary, the fact is that life, liberty, and property existed before, and that forces one to consider law supreme. " There are no better claims of God-given natural rights than the words in the American Declaration of Independence and in Bastiat's work of the Law. Bastiat attached his hope for freedom to America when he wrote: “… Look at America. There is no country in the world where the law has such a suitable framework: Protecting the liberty and property of each person. As a result, there seems to be no country in the world that has such a solid foundation for the social order ”. In 1850, Bastiat observed, there were two problems that America lacked: “Slaves violate - by law - freedom. A protective import-export tax is a violation - by law - of property ownership ”. Boxing is cheaper than therapy poster. I know how to respond, I know what objections can be made. But this is not the place for such controversy. I would like to simply remark here that the controversy over universal suffrage (as well as most other political issues) that is stirring up, provoking and overthrowing nations, will lose nearly all of its importance if law were always what it should be. In fact, if the law is only to protect everyone, all freedoms and all property; if the law is merely an organized combination of the individual's right to self-defense; If the law is to obstruct, prevent, punish all oppression and robbery - will we, as citizens, debate the size of the right to vote? Under such circumstances, would the magnitude of the right to vote endanger the ultimate good, to social peace? Wouldn't the electoral classes not wait in peace their right to vote? Would those who have the right to vote fiercely defend their privilege?
Homepage: TEASEARCH.
Comments