We’ve all heard the phrase, law and order. But if law is order, which it is, then the phrase is ridiculous. Or is it? Is there more, something we don’t know?
The word ‘law,’ means ‘order,’ in etymology. Law means orderliness, the disposition of things relative to each other. It means patterns, regularity or consistency; not rule, directives or commandment. We speak of putting or arranging things We don’t say, ‘arrange these things in law.’
Law and order?
That’s because the word ‘law’ also refers to constitutional rules issued by governments. This is not law, however. It is ‘statute rule.’ It seems, therefore, that the phrase law and order, means to maintain orderliness in society. Most folk won’t object to that. Many will agree it is necessary. That would explain why we speak of ‘law and order.’
Rule versus Order
Do you see the underlying subterfuge? We’re led to believe that societal wellbeing is only achievable through authoritative rule. But wait! Doesn’t ‘rule’ itself interfere with, or abrogate society’s natural and peaceful concord? Isn’t it true that authoritative demands conflict with people’s free right to live as they choose? Theft through taxation and punishable refusal is a good example. So, authoritative rule destroy orderliness in society, while asserting to uphold it. It’s long past time to abolish that insanity. Law and order is a nonsense.
Could society exhibit a natural orderliness of its own desire and accord? Is it possible that society could abide by natural law—a natural orderliness? That has never happened, save for some small tribal cultures regarded as primitive. Why have we not done so?
Natural law – natural order
To answer that question we must first be clear about the laws of nature. Physical things like stars, atoms, gravity, and thermodynamics, abide by nature’s laws. These laws, discovered by our physical sciences, are inviolable and immutable. They cannot break or change, but are not thought to apply to humanity. How could we be bound by laws, and still have free will? This prompts two questions.
If nature does not rule our free will, what will ensure our freedom—from rule or infraction? If we do have natural laws that govern us, shouldn’t they ensure that free will is forever free?
Think for a moment. We can choose what we eat or drink, but we cannot change how our body deals with what we consume. Natural laws govern our digestive systems, so why should our mental processes be any different? They should not. Free will process governed by unchangeable laws is perfect. Why? So that our thoughts be completely free and independent.
Order means freedom
That is how it should be, and indeed how it is. Such certainty is truly beautiful for humans? We are free to soar on our own wings of thought and expression as the unique individuals that we are. Creator has governed our choice process, specifically so that it cannot interfere with what we choose to think. Natural law is natural order, therefore. By contrast, Law and order is a subterfuge. The natural law of free will exists to ensure that our thought process is never corrupted! Accordingly, we, each, are in charge of our lives. This means that laws of nature most certainly do apply to our mental processes, exactly as for stars and atoms. It remains that natural laws are for human sciences to discover. Our free will process is immutable, unchangeable, and universal. Free will content is ours by unalienable right, and upheld by natural law.
This exposes today’s problem. State laws command what we should mentally process. They deny the ‘free will’ process, in principle. Commanded to obey statute ‘rules’ and threatened by force for refusal, our choice is not free. Man has made rules that nature herself forbids.
Isn’t it time to re-think how law, rules, and morality relate to one another. Articles 1.3 and 1.4 of the Constitution cover non-aggression. The natural law of no trespass is fully explained in Law From Within.
Back to Blog Index