The great experiment
By Robert T. Smith
web posted January 14, 2013
We are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights...and so began the great experiment. Unfortunately, in this instance, the clash of ideas between the individual and their God, and the collective and their government is fomented by the deranged actions of the mentally ill murderer in Newtown, Connecticut.
No breaking news, but we are a divided nation. Barrack Obama was elected by approximately half of the voters in this country, no different than George W. Bush. Just about every issue du jour in today's partisan climate comes down to the essence of Americanism, the great experiment on public trial. Is the individual and their God empowered, or is the collective society and their government the controlling feature; it is just that simple.
In Newtown, the individual sees helpless, unarmed adults and children killed in a "gun-free-zone" and wishes that they or someone could have been there, armed, to stop the insane killer. The collective sees the presence of the weapon of choice as the issue and seeks more involvement by their government to provide for their full protection from the individual and allay their fears, and is thankful that they were not there to be likewise killed.
The individual wishes to end the insanity of "gun-free-zones", where only the individual killer is free to commit his crimes and maximize the effect on society that they apparently desire, in this case and many similar other mass shootings, on their way to suicide. The collective, through their President tells us we must put "politics" aside, and allow the government to remove guns from those who did not perpetrate the actions of the deranged killer, and that this disarming of the individual will provide the wish of security that is collectively desired.
The Constitutional protection of the right to be armed was established as a God-given right of the individual, set forth as an inalienable right; in essence, a keep out sign to the collective or government control. The collective sees the founding documents of our country as quaint old documents from the horse and buggy days; a place that we have "progressed" beyond.
Consider this familiar quote attributed to Alexander Tytler regarding the progression of civilization.
From bondage to spiritual faith
From spiritual faith to great courage
From courage to liberty
From liberty to abundance
From abundance to complacency
From complacency to apathy
From apathy to dependence
From dependence back into bondage
Dependency lives where autonomy and the notion of the individual are given to another, in this case, the government. Dependence is offered, not taken. Bondage is the one way street where you have no choice.
Where do we stand today in our country in this algorithm assigned to civilization's progress? Julius Caesar changed the course of history when he faced his own critical decision of whether to cross the Rubicon River with his legions, an act of war upon the Roman government. Here we stand at the American Rubicon, deciding, as a divided nation on so many issues, whether to set the algorithm back to the Americanism of liberty and abundance or continue the trajectory toward dependence and bondage. 
Robert T. Smith is an environmental scientist who spends his days enjoying life and the pursuit of happiness with his family. He confesses to cling to his liberty, guns and religion, with antipathy toward the arrogant ruling elites throughout the country.