Why have Government and what is its Purpose

No government, of any fashion, has ever served except with the acquiescence of the ruled people. The people always have the power through sheer numbers to dispose of any government.

The government serves no purpose other than to serve the people. Most governments provide for common defense against outside aggression, a common infrastructure of roads, and a common defense against crime and catastrophic disaster such as fire and flood. Our American form of government provides all of these and, additionally, protects the rights of the individual from infringement by other citizens and the government as much as is practical while meeting its responsibilities to all of its citizens, at least in theory. It is not without its failures, as is illustrated by the practice of slavery that led to a civil war, its dealings with the Native American peoples, the rise of segments of the population that had to demand their civil rights, and the passing of Prohibition. These have been corrected to an extent and are still being constantly improved. We are still, and always will be, attempting to find the perfect balance between what the government must accomplish and the freedom of the individual.

In my recent and long debate over our education system in Clay County, I looked at many facts and figures, what was being planned, and what the comparison of the facts and figures indicated would best serve the community to deliver education at the lowest cost. I found indications that what was planned was not the path that the data supported as being the optimum choice and made an attempt to change the plan. My point is that the individual must, at times, get involved in government activities beyond simply obeying the law and casting a ballot or accept the consequences. (I am not interested in re-debating the decisions that have been made concerning our schools.) As with decisions that have been made in our government that were later changed, slavery, civil rights, etc., the citizen must become involved to the level which his conscience dictates and that right must never be abridged by any segment of the government.

A recent change in what appears, at first glance, to be a minor government activity has heightened my level of concern over government within the City of Brazil; that being a requirement to prove residency and identification to use private property without interference by government except to protect public health and safety. To me, the change in the procedure is an un-needed escalation of government involvement beyond what is already written into our code of ordinances to protect the public and restricts the right to use an individual's property beyond the public need. To many, this may be a minor thing but I believe that if you do not fight(as in debate) to keep the rights you have, you may one day find it necessary to engage in armed conflict to get them restored as was the case in 1776.

The Constitution of the United States grants no rights to the individual; what it does is limit the government's ability to interfere with rights that the individual has. It is my contention that all levels of government should consider carefully its actions against the freedom of the individual at all times.

What say you?