The Jefferson Discussion Group of Orlando

Home

Press Release

Monthly Topics

Mailing List

Contact Us



The Thomas Jefferson Discussion Group
of Orlando, Florida

Meeting No. 61 - August 29, 2006
Holiday House Restaurant, Orlando, Florida



THIS MONTH'S TOPIC:
THOMAS JEFFERSON VS. AARON BURR AND SOVEREIGNTY


Sovereignty. The word has been thrown around quite a bit recently.

Israel’s right to exist and defend itself as a sovereign nation against Iran who practices hegemony over the Hezbollah faction in Lebanon, and, for that matter, the freely elected sovereign government of Lebanon.

The accusations against the United States of hegemony in its directing the behavior of other sovereign nations. For example, destroying, reshaping and influencing the government of a sovereign Iraq - even if the government we destroyed was a tyranical one with little respect for human rights.

Should three sovereign nations be formed in Iraq, since it seems the Sunni, Shi’a and Kurds clearly cannot exist as one sovereign nation.

Should North Korea and Iran not have the right to develop nuclear weapons as sovereign nations.

What rights go along with sovereignty? Is our country’s sovereignty violated by a sovereign Mexican government that encourages citizens to illegally enter the United States? If so, what recourse do we have?

What about Jefferson? What would he say about these sovereignty questions? We speak of national sovereignty. I think Jefferson would start with personal sovereignty. He stated as much in the Declaration: people endowed with certain inalienable rights - among these life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This is where Jefferson believed all sovereignty begins: with the individual. After all, sovereignty is freedom from outside interference - the ability to make decisions in one’s self interest, unencumbered by outside forces. In representative self-government the individual agrees to a surrogate to act in their behalf in certain areas. By proxy, therefore, the government is granted sovereignty by virtue of the individuals’ sovereignty.

As someone said recently, why shouldn’t an individual have the right the sell one of her kidneys to the highest bidder, rather than having to donate the kidney and then let the government decide who will get it? Who’s kidney is it anyway? Doesn’t this practice violate the person’s sovereignty? Or, since a freely elected government made this a law, is the individual’s sovereignty not an issue? Did the government have a right to make this law in the first place? Where in the Federal Constitution do we the people give the government this right? Is this a states’ rights issue? We can sell our blood. Why not are kidneys (most of us can easily live with one kidney), or heart, for that matter. And, that causes me pose another question to all you Darwinists: why do we have 2 kidneys? Seems like a waste of protoplasm :)

How does this relate to Jefferson and Burr?




Home

Press Release

Monthly Topics

Mailing List

Contact Us

© The Jefferson Project, All Rights Reserved
webmaster@thejeffersonproject.org