Where does the authority of the state come from?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fakename
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fakename

Guest
Having thought about this more (by reading an Aquinas commentary on Politics) I can more profitably re-ask the same questions and a few new ones.

Here they are: Is the authority of the state derived from two sources (1) it’s ability to provide the means of life and (2) it’s ability to provide the means of moral improvement?

Also do you think that there are certain rights which are equal among all men and that these include the right to food, property, health (as opposed to rights like honor or good birth or positive rights)? Or can one believe that not everyone even has the same degree of even the former rights though they all equally have the same quality of rights (by quality I mean that they are all human rights and potentially (at least) equal)?

That is, do people have equal rights and if they do, do they have equal degrees of rights?

But a second set of questions also occurs to me. For one, if the state’s power is as wide as its ability to provide the means towards morality then what will be the power of the Church? Also, how can it be possible that the state should never extend its laws to all things? Perhaps it can extend its laws to all things but not all aspects of all things?

Also, if equitability is a virtue (and if its nature is to correct the failings of law) then how can the law apply to everything? For then the law, which makes men good, would destroy a virtue by providing for all things?

And if the state has authority based on its ability to meet the material needs of men, then
does the state have the authority to nationalize property? If such nationalization generally leads to poverty, then how can the state fulfill its task to bring men to happiness which latter entails riches?

But perhaps the state does not derive authority from exactly this action. Perhaps by “meeting the material needs of men” the state doesn’t complete and make possible the realization of material satisfaction but rather the state makes possible the realization of one particular economic benefit, namely security or insurance?

Thoughts and comments are quite needed please.
 
In prior American times, it came by the consent of the governed. Like everything else governmental, it has assumed a life of its own.

The state can defend rights, but only those which we are granted by God. When it differs from this formula, attempting to either define, impose or deny rights, it becomes a god.
 
po18guy said:
In prior American times, it came by the consent of the governed. Like everything else governmental, it has assumed a life of its own.

The state can defend rights, but only those which we are granted by God. When it differs from this formula, attempting to either define, impose or deny rights, it becomes a god.
Click to expand...
Like the right to free speech and the right to freedom of religion, neither of which was upheld by the Church before they were established by secular or democratic states?
 
Since all good things derive from the Creator, Almighty God , the right to free speech and the right to freedom of religion existed from the beginning and were not given to us by any government or other authority.
Tom Kearney
 
Hokomai said:
Like the right to free speech and the right to freedom of religion, neither of which was upheld by the Church before they were established by secular or democratic states?
Click to expand...
Both Free speech and the freedom to practice faith produce, or lead to, peace and unity, which have their source in the one God. Have a read of this interesting political document. Do your rights derive from a fellow homosapien, or from a collective of them?
 
fakename said:
Is the authority of the state derived from two sources (1) it’s ability to provide the means of life and (2) it’s ability to provide the means of moral improvement?
Click to expand...
I think the American Declaration of Independence summed it up nicely:

W****e hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal,

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,

that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –

**That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, **
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends,

**it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, **
and
to institute new Government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form,

as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.

P****rudence, indeed, will dictate
that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;
**and **
accordingly all experience hath shewn,
**that mankind are more disposed to suffer, **
while evils are sufferable,

than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
 
The State derives its authority from two sources: an adaptation of mostly British law, and truths. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

The State cannot guarantee happiness, or that no one will be poor.

The State can establish programs that help the poor and working poor, and create things like Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare.

The State cannot nationalize private businesses. However, in times of war, the State can intervene in cases where, for example, labor disputes are holding up the production of war material.

The authority of the State is based on certain truths and they are endowed by a Creator, not men. Men can and do make laws and the State is divided into branches so as to provide “checks and balances” against abuses of power by other branches of the State.

So, for those who know history, there is a Creator and there are truths that are self-evident and apply to all equally.

Hope this helps,
Ed
 
Read the whole Declration of Independence not just the first few lines.
 
Hokomai said:
Like the right to free speech and the right to freedom of religion, neither of which was upheld by the Church before they were established by secular or democratic states?
Click to expand...
The Church has always taught that we have free will to either accept God or reject him. This teaching of the Church is freedom of religion and is a lot older than any of our modern governments.
 
Let me just defend the thesis that freedom of religion is a God given right. Obviously God would not want his doctrines to be corrupted and so he would not want there to be freedom of religion unless it happened that protecting the rights of truth interfered with some other moral imperative.

Let me also pose my question in a different way. To discover the origins of state authority we must look to how the state was and is established -that is we must find how state emerges from non-state.

To what end? To answering these two questions: (1) is the state the whole political community or just the officers of it or something else? (2) is the state created to serve either the material or moral needs of the community or the needs (either moral or material) of a different group of people?

That is, what makes the state essentially different from anything else?
 
po18guy said:
Are you in denial? Since no god grants you your rights, you receive them solely at the discretion of the state.
Click to expand...
No, I receive them through democratic processes. They are granted to the members of society by society. The state is merely one aspect of that process. In a democratic society, to the extent to which it is democratic, l’etat, c’est moi!
 
livingwordunity said:
The Church has always taught that we have free will to either accept God or reject him. This teaching of the Church is freedom of religion and is a lot older than any of our modern governments.
Click to expand...
But the church has not always accepted the exercise of that free will and has persecuted people who come to different conclusions, and encouraged the invasion of their countries, if they live elsewhere.
 
Hokomai said:
No, I receive them through democratic processes. They are granted to the members of society by society. The state is merely one aspect of that process. In a democratic society, to the extent to which it is democratic, l’etat, c’est moi!
Click to expand...
Semantics, which means “the state” What if the democratic process decides that you have no rights? Sounds rather chimeric in nature. No external, or eternal foundation or source. That is not the recipe for enduring success.
 
po18guy said:
Semantics, which means “the state” What if the democratic process decides that you have no rights? Sounds rather chimeric in nature. No external, or eternal foundation or source. That is not the recipe for enduring success.
Click to expand...
If people mess things up they mess things up. The Church held huge power for centuries. No enduring success there. At least while democracy is in place there is a possibility of freedom of speech, assembly, religion and non-belief. When all rulers were Catholic, I would have been killed if I expressed my views, making me both unsuccessful and unenduring! Incidentally, “democracy” and "the state’ are not the same thing, and it is not mere semantics to argue that they are. Words have meanings and these words do not mean the same thing.
 
I can tell you this. The authority of ‘the state’ does NOT come from me. I do not recognize any human who works for the government as ‘my leader’ or similar. I bow to the authority of God and Jesus Christ, not men with fancy hats or whatever that work in Washington DC.
 
livingwordunity said:
The Church has always taught that we have free will to either accept God or reject him. This teaching of the Church is freedom of religion and is a lot older than any of our modern governments.
Click to expand...
It’s kind of funny when you think about it in those terms. God, the highest authority of all allows us the free will to accept or deny him, to accept and abide by his laws or reject and not follow them.

But the STATE, they offer no such option. Makes me wonder. If the government was so good, why do they need to force their services on me at the barrel of a gun? God doesn’t do that. All the more reason to love and respect God the Almighty.
 
Hokomai said:
But the church has not always accepted the exercise of that free will and has persecuted people who come to different conclusions, and encouraged the invasion of their countries, if they live elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Men are fallible and make mistakes. All the more reason to be leary of giving power to a select few of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top