Social Justice , Free Will, and the Connecticut Budget

Our creator gave humans the unique natural right of free will. From this and other genetic qualities we formed natural groups, (eg.family units), that adopted moral codes to achieve a structured society based upon social mores, traditions, and laws. Among commonly accepted moral codes is one that cites compassion and charity to others. This meant sharing goods and services with others in a free market capitalistic manner.This is an acceptable pattern to help each other, be responsible, achieve respect, and feel better about yourself; downstream qualities that we all admire.
Social justice is an amorphous term that characterizes the application of justice on a social scale. The justice term suggests an equal application of the laws of men and the laws of nature to a society that adopts such thinking across a scale that is predefined and meets the criteria of said society. Such a scale could include ethnicity, race, status, economic class, or other factors as practiced in that society.The Federalist Papers Article 7 take note of this concept in acknowledging contracts as authority:

"Laws in violation of private contracts, as they amount to aggressions on the rights of those States whose citizens are injured by them, may be considered as another probable source of hostility. We are not authorized to expect that a more liberal or more equitable spirit would preside over the legislations of the individual States hereafter, if unrestrained by any additional checks, than we have heretofore seen in too many instances disgracing their several codes. We have observed the disposition to retaliation excited in Connecticut in consequence of the enormities perpetrated by the Legislature of Rhode Island; and we reasonably infer that, in similar cases, under other circumstances, a war, not of PARCHMENT, but of the sword, would chastise such atrocious breaches of moral obligation and social justice."

On a larger scale, a socially just world could include human rights and equality for all. We can also recognize how our Judeo Christian society seeks to redress all ills of humanity under this thinking.The freedoms of the United States is a gift that we offer to all as a "shining city upon the hill as a beacon for freedom" which evolved from the first governor of pilgrim settled Massachusetts when he said thanks to God for "the city upon the hill". Our country's exceptionalism is a gift from the creator and serves to demonstrate the model that is sought by all human kind.

We now watch the Connecticut legislature continue to cope with the budget conflicts that arise over the interpretations of what social services should be provided at what cost. Under the umbrella of social justice we struggle with the definition of a "safety net" to be funded by government and selectively chosen by elected officials who "know best". Where voluntary charity was the source of such assistance we now allow elected officials to confiscate our wealth in the form of taxes and direct it to causes, special interests, and subsidies of their choosing. "Spreading the wealth around" becomes the overall agenda for those who would plunder our private property earnings to seek a world that they deem correct. Charity in their way of thinking is inadequate and they do not get to make their targeted choices. Government should not be practicing utopian social engineering and experimenting upon people. Taking my money and using it to benefit irresponsible behaviors and limiting my freedom of choice for a prejudiced "greater good" is not "justice that arose from the people" (John Rawls). Eminent Domain had worthy origins but now falls into this category of confiscation and suspicious insider application. We have a society in Connecticut where almost half the population is free from taxes while the other half pays. This is an imbalance of "social responsibility" and may soon create a ruling, free of tax, class that confiscates even more from those left who earn.Utopia has been a failure in all cases where applied.