A Tulalip 4th of July
Last evening I spent a wonderful 4th of July at a friend's house on the Tulalip Reservation. It was a most remarkable time as her house is on the beach and we had impressive home displays of fireworks going on all around us.
To the front of her house we overlooked the water with the City of Everett beyond, a city that was teeming with fireworks as far as the eye could see. To the sides and back of us fireworks were exploding very close as her neighbors on the reservation did their best to provide a superb show.
We even had a large number of our own, so didn't feel left out when lighting them. With the wonderful BBQ before the fireworks, it was a truly traditional 4th of July, celebrated, as the holiday should be.
One thing I was very pleased to see was the huge number of people violating the misguided and moronic fireworks ban within the City of Everett. It seems that the statist nannies of that city have decided that fireworks are dangerous, so must be banned. Luckily loads of people obviously disagree, and like good American's did what should be done with immoral laws, they ignored the law.
"It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more."
-John Adams, President of the United States discussing our nation's birthday. It is sad that the statists who ban fireworks have forgotten the importance of tradition in national life.
Comments
I have no use for moronic laws that attempt to save us from ourselves. Still, I believe that once a law is passed, we are criminals if we don't abide. Unless one is breaking a law to test it, be prosecuted, and then appeal to eventually have it overturned, one is just a law-breaker.
Posted by: susan's pet | July 6, 2010 4:30 PM
Susan's pet,
I fear that I must disagree.
We are under no moral obligation to respect improper laws. If such a moral obligation existed then our very nation would have not been founded as the doing so was certainly in violation of British law, and our founding fathers were British subjects at the time.
M
Posted by: Milliscent | July 11, 2010 12:00 PM
I don't think we disagree. My position is to disagree with immoral or improper laws in a lawful way. Our constituion still provides the way to do so although the current dictator is trying to circumvent that.
I have precipitated a revolution that eventually brought down a tyrannical communist regime, so I am not beyond doing civil disobedience. Of course, back then I was a rash youngster thinking that I would live forever.
As for the American colonies breaking with King George's decrees, I would have been there to help in any way I could.
It is just, that when we break any law, we are criminals. If we do it for a greater purpose, it does not absolve us of the deed, but we can pursue it, at least for a while, until the Socialists negate our constitution.
Posted by: susan's pet | July 11, 2010 6:04 PM
Susan's pet,
I had a bit of an idea about your background, so was surprised by your first comment. Thank you for explaining in a bit more detail.
I guess that I see a great difference between a criminal who has violated a law that is properly and morally in place, and a 'criminal' who has violated an improper law.
For example, I think that a murderer is truly a criminal but I don't think that an American who travels to Cuba without government permission are. Both however can be prosecuted as such.
M
Posted by: Milliscent | July 18, 2010 5:02 PM
Dear Lady,
I am glad that we can disagree in some issues but still have a civil conversation. Although I am not a diplomat, I think that I could learn.
I try not to give away much of my background. My blog already has enough in it to identify me to one who tries to dig. I do have a colorful background, a caring family, and many friends who might not care to find out that I am one of those sissy boys who likes to serve a woman. Then again, they might envy me.
I have been around the world and seen and done more than a lifetime of events. I still get out there to do things, but try to limit them to less potentially deadly attempts. I am still brave, but less foolish.
Posted by: susan's pet | July 19, 2010 2:58 PM
Susan's pet,
Indeed, folks can never agree on everything, so it's great when they can 'disagree without being disagreeable!'
M
Posted by: Milliscent | July 24, 2010 7:47 PM