"The constitutionality and propriety of the Federal Government assuming to enter into a novel and vast field of legislation, namely, that of providing for the care and support of all those … who by any form of calamity become fit objects of public philanthropy. ... I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for making the Federal Government the great almoner of public charity throughout the United States. To do so would, in my judgment, be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive of the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded."
Franklin Pierce
(1804-1869) U.S. President
May 3, 1854, President Pierce when vetoing a bill to help the mentally ill
Bookmark and Share  
Reader comments about this quote:
"Public Philanthropy" can not be achieved without blatant theft.
 -- J Carlton, Calgary     
  • 4
    Where the hell else is the buck suppose to stop. A man does what a MAN can, thus LBJ took on Civil Rights when he was in office. Some guys like Reagan and the Bushes went the other way. Depends on your idea of manhood I guess. A Big Man in my view helps the little guy, a little guy like Pierce helps the big guy and kisses his butt.
     -- Waffler, Smith     
  • 3 5
    right on. in this world you have to help yourself or you will be dependant on Uncle Sam everytime something bad happens.like the saying goes"dust yourself off and start again"(close enough)
     -- h.lasky, sac. ca     
  • 4
     -- T Lappas, Silver Spring, Md      
    Waffler , your comments ,as usual, make no sense. It's not a "big man" who steals someones money and gives it to someone else. J carlton said it well and Franklin Pierce was that rare President that seemed to respect the Constitution.
     -- jim k, Austin,Tx     
  • 5
    To "Waffler": I suggest that you read the US Constitution and point out where in that document it provides that the federal governmnet must provide for those who cannot - or in most cases - will not provide for themselve. Another point. LBJ was successful on civil rights becuase of Republicans and because "civil rights" of all citizens of all colors are in fact protected by that same constitution.
     -- rudyalso, Ft. Worth, TX     
  • 5
    Excellent!! Waffler, you want a beneficent King to serve in exchange for favors and titles. It is not the American way to seek a kind and wealthy master but to be masters of our own destiny even when the fates may be unkind. It is the difference between the serf and the sovereign. In America, each person is a sovereign soul, master of his/her own life. But there are some who would prefer to be taken care of and use their collective force to steal the property and labors of those that do not want to join their 'corporation.' That is where fascism/communism gets its power, from people who want more power and wealth than they are willing to earn. By joining a powerful mob, their collective force can be wielded against any strong individual -- and they justify such crimes by saying 'we took a vote, and you lost.' Just hope you are never in the minority... Yes, Waffler, you need a King's ass to kiss.
     -- E Archer, NYC     
  • 8
    What a quaint concept; that the government ought to be limited to what the law authorizes. Now we are hearing the call for a global tax on financial transactions to hand over to the dictators of the world who say they will feed their poor while blue helmeted UN thugs look on (with the occasional child rape of course). Soon all the world will look like Zimbabwe. Oh, Brave New World...
     -- Ken, Allyn, WA     
  • 6
     -- Johann Hollar, Saint Paul, MN      
    This is so appropriate today - by way of example, the Supreme Court never ruled on the Constitutionality of Obama Care only, that the fed could tax what ever it wanted.
     -- Mike, Norwalk     
  • 4
    Truly Virtuous stewardship never entails the
    cultivation of states of dependency, whether within the construct of the Family, which is the seminary of the State, or within society, at large.
     -- Patrick Henry, Red Hill     
  • 2
     -- Patrick Henry, Red Hill      
     -- jim k, Austin      

    Waffler, your supportive patronage of the totalitarian statist theocracy infesting this land is a demonstrative exposť in a hatred of individual sovereignty, inalienable rights, liberty and the "laws of nature and of nature's God" (Declaration of Independence). The de jure States united was based on secular applications of natural law. The carnal government may be your religion, not mine.

    Religion is: a sacrosanct object of conscience (an ethic(s), a moral(s), a value (system) or an orientation of correctness / enlightenment) believed sufficiently conventional as to enable an attributable action(s). Religion’s initiating elements of conscience, through fruition of action, encompasses self-obligated pursuits, imperative practices and devoted interests (by way of extreme brevity / example: safety, health, fairness, life style acceptance, monetary equality vs. equality before the law, and well being). A ‘god’, ‘causation’, or other ‘relegated source’ of such enabling elements may or may not be instrumental (or even useful) in defining religion. (by way of example: Buddhism, Taoism, societal ethics and Humanism are religions without a god or other extra human manifestation). When a god is implemented into a religion it is to justify and make sense of the conventionally held ethics, morals and beliefs.

    Religion is: “ real piety in practice, consisting in the performance of all known duties to ⋯ our fellow men.” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary) This definition’s focus is on “real piety in practice” - and - “the performance of all known duties” - again, a sacrosanct object of conscience believed sufficiently conventional as to enable attributable actions (socialism or democratic socialism are destructive economic systems in and of them selves – not religion; BUT! ! !, when socialism is forcibly implemented by reason of ethics, morals, orientation of correctness, real piety in practice or, felt/believed sufficiently conventional as to enable performance of all known duties to a fellow man, socialism becomes a religion).

    Webster's New World Dictionary - Fourth College Edition uses a slightly different vantage on Bouvier’s “fellow men” by stating, Religion is: “a.) any specific system of belief and worship, often involving a code of ethics and a philosophy [the Christian religion, the Buddhist religion, etc.] b.) any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, etc. resembling, suggestive of, or likened to such a system [humanism as a religion] ⋯ any object of conscientious regard and pursuit.”

    “we did indeed refer to ‘secular humanism’ as a ‘religion.” (Justice Antonin Scalia, In Torcaso v. Watkins, (1961)). “To hold that invocations must be nonsectarian would force the legislatures ⋯ and the courts ⋯ to act as ⋯ censors of religious speech. ⋯ Government may not mandate a civic religion that stifles any but the most generic reference to the sacred any more than it may prescribe a religious orthodoxy ⋯" (Justice Anthony Kennedy, Town of Greece, NY, v. Galloway et al, 20140)

    Religions are recognizable by their moral and ethical tenets, by terse example: clothe the naked, feed the hungry, house the homeless, finance the indigent, aide the sick and otherwise afflicted, regulate religious sacraments such as marriage, and aide and abet human sacrifice to the gods of pleasure and life style. Religions are also recognizable by their dogma canons outside the laws of nature and of nature’s God (Declaration of Independence - absolute law such as gravity, physics and that which concerns life, liberty and property).

     -- Mike, Norwalk     
  • 1
    Rate this quote!
    How many stars?

    What do YOU think?
    Your name:
    Your town:

    More Quotations
    Get a Quote-A-Day! Free!
    Liberty Quotes sent to your mail box.
    RSS Subscribe
    Quotes & Quotations - Send This Quote to a Friend

    © 1998-2024 Liberty-Tree.ca