Inalienable Rights Aren't Free

As Hobby Lobby presents its case before the Supreme Court, I found one disturbing under tone.  The case itself revolves around whether the government can force a corporation to engage in an activity that runs contrary to the religious beliefs of its owners.  Many on the opposing side have attempted to establish that healthcare is a right, not simply granted by the constitution, but also exists as one that is unalienable.  Therefore, it should be granted (in most cases given) to all without charge; not unlike life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  What these proponents of healthcare rights fail to realize is that no right is free, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

It was easy to write down those words in the Declaration of Independence.  However, that in itself did nothing to produce the rights we today.  Since Thomas Jefferson composed that document our country has paid dearly to secure its meaning; including a war against England and a civil war amongst our own states.  We have rioted in the streets and marched on Washington.  Inalienable rights require a constant struggle against those that wish to use the power of government to subvert the will of the people. 

Unfortunately, as of late, that struggle has been stifled by the cultivation of complacency through government reliance.  The progressive movement has instilled in US citizens that inalienable rights are granted by our government.  They did not, nor did they truly ever, require individual vigilance to maintain since the government does so on our behalf.  However, in doing this, they no longer exist as inalienable; but rather, become malleable and transient based on the political agenda of the current ruling class. 

This then leads us to case of Hobby Lobby.  At its core, we have a ruling class that has determined healthcare to be a free right.  This is no longer a debate about healthcare being a simply an inalienable right, as we all know that in our country care will be administered regardless of individual status.  Rather, the desire is to present the need for healthcare to be a free right.  When one is taught that inalienable rights are granted to them by an authoritarian body, instead of by ‘natures God’, elections and the power of persuasion become the god by which rights are discerned.  Thus, if life, liberty and pursuit of happiness were freely bestowed upon us by a benevolent government, that government should also be able to freely bestow upon us anything we can deem as rights. 

As history has shown, a benevolent government does not exist.  Our country has survived this long, not because our government has granted proper rights; but because ‘we the people’ held those rights regardless of government policy.  Unfortunately, willingly surrendering these rights to a governmental body under a misguided understanding they can be freely given in return, will only serve to prove the true malevolence within governments of men.